Lancour, Shane v. City of LaCrosse PD et al

Filing 3

ORDER on ifp request: Complaint taken under advisement for screening. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter A. Oppeneer on 3/4/2015. (jef),(ps)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN SHANE T. LANCOUR, Plaintiff, ORDER v. Case No. 15-cv-105-wmc CITY OF LACROSSE PD, et al. Defendants. Plaintiff Shane T. Lancour, an inmate in the custody of the LaCrosse County Jail, has submitted a proposed civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, however, he has provided the court with a copy of his inmate account statement (Dkt. #2), which I construe as a request for leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. After considering plaintiff’s inmate account statement, the court concludes that he qualifies for indigent status and lacks the funds to make an initial payment of the filing fee in this case. Plaintiff is advised that he will remain obligated to pay the full amount of the $350 filing fee for indigent litigants, even if this court ultimately determines that his complaint cannot go forward. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The Clerk of Court will ensure that the court’s financial records reflect that plaintiff owes the $350 fee for filing this case. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff Shane T. Lancour’s request for leave to proceed without prepayment of filing fee (Dkt. # 2) is GRANTED. 1 2. No further action will be taken in this case until the court has screened the complaint as required by the PLRA, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. complete, a separate order will issue. Entered this 4th day of March, 2015. BY THE COURT: /s/ PETER OPPENEER Magistrate Judge 2 Once the screening process is

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.


Why Is My Information Online?