Hartzell v. Miami County Incarceration Facility
| Kenneth S Hartzell |
| Miami County Incarceration Facility |
| 3:2017cv00063 |
| February 23, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Dayton Office |
| MIAMI |
| Michael J. Newman |
| Walter H. Rice |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
16
CLERK'S JUDGMENT. Signed on 9/29/2017. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
14
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT: (1) PRO SE PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT BE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; AND (2) THIS CASE BE TERMINATED ON THE COURTS DOCKET. Objections to R&R due by 9/19/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 9/5/2017. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER DIRECTING PRO SE PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE, IN WRITING AND WITHIN 14 DAYS, AS TO WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED - Show Cause Response due by 8/29/2017.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 8/15/2017. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
12
DECISION AND ENTRY: (1) DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PRO SE PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR AN ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION; (2) GRANTING PRO SE PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT ON OR BEFORE JULY 7, 2017; AND (3) DENYING PRO SE PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 6/15/2017. (dm)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER -Pro se Plaintiff is ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE, in writing and within 14 days from the entry of this Order, as to why he should be permitted to proceed IFP. In lieu of showing cause, Plaintiff may pay the required $400.00 filing fee with the C lerk of Court. Pro se Plaintiff is NOTIFIED that failure to SHOW CAUSE or pay the required filing fee as directed above may result in a dismissal of this case for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 4/21/2017. (dm)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
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 Ohio Southern 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
| Search for this case: Hartzell v. Miami County Incarceration Facility | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Kenneth S Hartzell | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Miami County Incarceration Facility | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
