Quantcast

Case activity for Albert Winfrey Bey vs Chaplain Lambert Gohen on May 18

MADISON - ST. CLAIR RECORD

Sunday, December 22, 2024

Case activity for Albert Winfrey Bey vs Chaplain Lambert Gohen on May 18

Filings
General court 05

shutterstock.com

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois reported the following activities in the suit brought by Albert Winfrey Bey against Chaplain Lambert Gohen on May 18.

'Memorandum And Order Severing Case Number 20-1282-njr. Signed By Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel On 5/18/2021. (tjk)'

'Complaint Against Chaplain Lambert-goheen, Filed By Albert Winfrey-Bey.(tjk)'

'Supplement By Albert Winfrey-Bey. Supplement To 2 Complaint. (tjk)'

'Second Supplement By Albert Winfrey-Bey. Supplement To 2 Complaint. (tjk)'

'Third Supplement By Albert Winfrey-Bey. Supplement To 2 Complaint. (tjk)'

'Fourth Supplement By Albert Winfrey-Bey. Supplement To 2 Complaint. (tjk)'

'Motion For Leave To Proceed In Forma Pauperis By Albert Winfrey-Bey. (tjk)'

'Notice From Clerk Instructing Winfrey-bey To File Notice And Consent To Proceed Before A Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form: Pursuant To Administrative Order No. 257, Within 21 Days Of This Notice, You Must File The Attached Form Indicating Your Consent To Proceed Before A Magistrate Judge Or An Affirmative Declination To Consent. Consent/non-consent To U.s. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form Sent To Winfrey-bey On 5/18/2021. Consent Due By 6/8/2021 (tjk)'

'Order: On 5/18/2021, This Case Was Severed From Winfrey-bey V. Baldwin, Et Al, Sdil Case No. 20-cv-1282-njr. Plaintiff Should Be Aware Of The Consequences Of Proceeding With This Action. First, The Court Will Screen The Action Pursuant To 28 U.s.c. 1915a, And Plaintiff Will Incur A Strike Within The Meaning Of Section 1915(g) If The Court Determines That The Action Is Frivolous Or Malicious, Fails To State A Claim On Which Relief May Be Granted, Or Seeks Monetary Relief Against A Defendant Who Is Immune From Such Relief. Second, Plaintiff Will Be Required To Pay An Additional $350.00 Filing Fee In This Case. Of Course, Plaintiff Can Also Opt Not To Proceed With This Action By Voluntarily Dismissing It, Thereby Avoiding The Risk Of A Strike And The Financial Burden Of An Additional Filing Fee. Plaintiff Should Carefully Consider These Points, Along With The Merits And Relative Importance Of This Lawsuit, In Deciding Whether To Proceed With It. Plaintiff Shall Have Until June 22, 2021 To Advise The Court In Writing Whether He Wishes To Proceed With This Lawsuit. If He Chooses To Go Forward, The Court Will Assess An Initial Partial Filing Fee (if Appropriate) And Screen The Complaint. On The Other Hand, If Plaintiff Opts To Voluntarily Dismiss The Case By The Deadline, He Will Not Have To Pay A Filing Fee, The Court Will Not Screen The Complaint, And The Case Will Be Dismissed Without Prejudice. Plaintiff Is Warned That If He Fails To Respond To This Order By The Deadline, He Will Be Obligated To Pay The Full Filing Fee And This Action Will Be Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution And/or For Failure To Comply With A Court Order. (action Due By 6/22/2021). Signed By Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel On 5/18/2021. (tjk)this Text Entry Is An Order Of The Court. No Further Documentation Will Be Mailed.'

Case number 3:21-cv-00494-NJR was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois on May 18.

More News