Lomack v. Brown et al
| Taiwan D. Lomack |
| Mayor Byron Brown, Sheriff Timothy B. Howard, Superintendent Thomas Duna, Alonzo Harris, Melissa Himmelsbach, P.R.S Specialist Kenneth Wells, Tina Standford, Commissioner Byron Lockwood, Firner Det. Leutenan Robert Danner, Lieutenant Patrick Boice, Patrol Officer Sean Ford, patrol Officer Kevin Murphy, Patrol Officer Joseph Mullens, Sgt. G. Spielzman, Capt. Whalen, Lt. Green, Lieutenant Sunberg, Sergeant P. Schein, Acting Lieutenant Paul Evans and Erie County Executiv Mark Poloncarz |
| 6:2021cv06558 |
| August 30, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Elizabeth A Wolford |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 5, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Clerk updated Plaintiff, Taiwan D. Lomack's address from Erie County Correctional Facility to Elmire Correctional Facility pursuant to #7 Notice of Change of Address. (LMD) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Change of Address by Taiwan D. Lomack (received for docketing on 10/5/2021.) (LMD) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Taiwan D. Lomack. The in forma pauperis form was not included in the envelope as stated in the letter. (JHF) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis with authorization. by Taiwan D. Lomack.(LMD) |
| Filing 4 JUDGMENT in favor of Green, Sunberg, Whalen, Alonzo Harris, Byron Brown, Byron Lockwood, G. Spielzman, Joseph Mullens, Kenneth Wells, Kevin Murphy, Mark Poloncarz, Melissa Himmelsbach, P. Schein, Patrick Boice, Paul Evans, Robert Danner, Sean Ford, Thomas Duna, Timothy B. Howard, Tina Standford against Taiwan D. Lomack. Signed by Mary C. Loewenguth, Clerk of Court on 9/7/20021. (Clerk mailed a copy of this Judgment to Plaintiff, Taiwan D. Lomak.) (LMD) |
Filing 3
ORDER denying without prejudice #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma paupeeris, Clerk shall administratively terminate this action without filing the Complaint or assessing a filing fee, Clerk of Court is directed to send to Plaintiff a form motion to proceed in forma pauperis with supporting affirmation and authorization form, if plaintiff wishes to reopen this action, he shall so notify this Court in writing no later than 30 days from the date of this Order, Upon submission of either the (1) required authorization form or the $350.00 filing fee and the $52.00 administrative fee ($402.00 total), the Clerk of Court shall reopen this case without further order. Signed by Hon. Elizabeth A. Wolford on 9/2/2021.(Clerk mailed a copy of this order to plaintiff on 9/7/2021 with the IFP Motion with supporting affirmation and authorization form. ) (LMD)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Taiwan D. Lomack.(LMD) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Taiwan D. Lomack.(LMD) |
| Prisoner Pro Se Packet consisting of Privacy Notice, Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge and Civil Case Timeline mailed to plaintiff. (LMD) |
| Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge: A United States Magistrate of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form (AO-85) is available for download at #http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/forms. (LMD) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
