Shuler v. Doe et al
| Lewis Shuler, Jr. |
| David A. Collins, Jane Doe, Janice S. Thomas, Patrick Wells, Jared P. Mollenkof, Kevin Kelly, Paul Harris, Norman Harris, Danielle Nellis, Adam C. Weeks and A. Dalton |
| 3:2018cv00854 |
| September 10, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Waverly D Crenshaw |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 29, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Letter from Lewis Clay Shulter Jr. re: status of case. (Docket sheet and habeas corpus forms to Lewis Shulter by regular mail.) (dt) Modified on 11/1/2018 (dt). |
Filing 8
ORDER denying #6 Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. To proceed with his lawsuit, Plaintiff MUST pay the $400.00 filing fee in full within 30 days of the date this Order is entered on the docket. At the same time, Plaintiff MUST SHOW CAUSE why he should not be sanctioned for his false assertion, under penalty of perjury, that he was unable to pay the filing fee that was due upon filing of his complaint. Plaintiff is cautioned that if he does not comply with this Order within the time frame specified, this action may be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with the Court's Order. Signed by Chief Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 10/25/18. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail. ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
| Filing 7 AMENDED COMPLAINT against David A. Collins, Jane Doe, A. Dalton, Danielle Nellis, Jared P. Mollenkof, Kevin Kelly, Adam C. Weeks, Paul Harris, Norman Harris, Patrick Wells and Janice S. Thomas, filed by Lewis Shuler, Jr.(dt) |
| Filing 6 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Lewis Shuler, Jr. (dt) |
| Filing 5 Letter regarding complaint from Lewis Shuler. (Pro se party sent a copy of the docket sheet by regular mail.) (am) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: Plaintiff Lewis Shuler, Jr., an inmate in the custody of the Davidson County Sheriff, has filed a pro se complaint for alleged violation of his civil rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 (Doc. No. #1 ), along with an application to proceed in district court without prepaying fees and costs. (Doc. No. #2 .) Plaintiff's pending application does not satisfy that requirement and is DENIED without prejudice to Plaintiff's ability to submit a properly supported application. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to mail Plaintiff a new blank application to proceed in forma pauperis (short form) and a copy of Administrative Order 93. To proceed with his lawsuit, Plaintiff MUST either pay the $400.00 filing fee in full or complete the application to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Chief Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 9/20/2018. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail along with an IFP application, and Administrative Order 93. ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(mg)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE/INFORMATION regarding Consent of the Parties to the Magistrate Judge. (afs) |
| Notice mailed to pro se party regarding filing of new case (docket sheet & certificate of service form included). (afs) |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Lewis Shuler, Jr. (afs) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against David A. Collins, Jane Doe, filed by Lewis Shuler, Jr. (afs) |
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 Tennessee Middle 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.
