Cijka v. Baker et al
Adam L. Cijka |
Morgan Rogers and James Baker |
2:2020cv00168 |
October 21, 2020 |
US District Court for the District of Vermont |
John M Conroy |
Christina Reiss |
Prisoner Petitions (Prison Condition) |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 17, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Robert M. LaRose, Esq on behalf of James Baker, Morgan Rogers.(LaRose, Robert) |
Filing 8 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed: Morgan Rogers waiver sent on 10/27/2020, answer due 12/28/2020. (eh) |
Filing 7 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed: James Baker waiver sent on 10/27/2020, answer due 12/28/2020. (eh) |
Filing 5 COMPLAINT against James Baker, Morgan Rogers filed by Adam L. Cijka. Waivers issued. (Attachments: #1 Attachments (unredacted, sealed), #2 Attachments (redacted)) (eh) |
Filing 4 ORDER Directing Monthly Payments be made from the prison account of Adam L. Cijka. Signed by Judge John M. Conroy on 10/27/2020. (eh) |
Filing 3 ORDER granting #1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge John M. Conroy on 10/27/2020. (eh) |
Filing 2 NOTICE OF PRO SE APPEARANCE by Adam L. Cijka.(eh) |
Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis filed by Adam L. Cijka. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Adam L. Cijka, #2 Proposed Complaint (image is sealed), #3 Civil Cover Sheet) (eh) |
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 Vermont 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.