Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Maxey v. Monahan

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION


September 25, 2006

BRIAN MAXEY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
THOMAS MONAHAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Brian Maxey ("Maxey") has just filed a 42 U.S.C. §1983 ("Section 1983") Complaint coupled with an In Forma Pauperis Application ("Application") and a Motion for Appointment of Counsel ("Motion"), using for each of those documents a printed form provided by this District Court's Clerk's Office. This memorandum order is issued sua sponte because the latter two submissions are legally insufficient.

As to the Application, Maxey has failed to provide a printout showing all transactions in his trust fund account for the period that began February 18, 2006 (a printout or printouts provided by the institution or institutions where he has been housed during that period). Such printouts are necessary to enable this Court to make the determination called for by 28 U.S.C. §1915.

As to the Motion, Maxey has not completed its most important provision, the Paragraph 2 statement as to the attempts that he has made to retain counsel to represent him. That information is essential to a determination by this Court as to whether pro bono counsel will or will not be appointed for that purpose.

Because it appears possible from Maxey's Complaint that some part of this action could be barred by limitations if its filing date were to coincide with any later date when he is able to cure the deficiencies identified here, this Court determines instead that if the missing items are provided on or before October 9, 2006 the case will be credited with a filing date as of September 22 (the date on which the papers were received in the Clerk's Office). But if Maxey does not comply with a timely submission in accordance with this memorandum order, this Court would be constrained to dismiss this action for nonpayment of the required filing fee.

20060925

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.