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.

Keith Ford v. Vallejo Police Department Detective Les Bottomley

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


November 17, 2011

KEITH FORD, PLAINTIFF,
v.
VALLEJO POLICE DEPARTMENT DETECTIVE LES BOTTOMLEY, DEFENDANT.

ORDER

Plaintiff, a county jail inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 together with a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff, the only party to appear in this action, has consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

In his request to proceed in forma pauperis, plaintiff represents that he is not employed at the jail and that he has not received any money from any source for the past twelve months. The trust account statement appended to the application, however, reflects twenty-three deposits to plaintiff's inmate trust account between October 3, 2010 and October 4, 2011 in amounts ranging from $19.00 to $102.00. Good cause appearing, plaintiff will be given an opportunity to explain the discrepancy between his in forma pauperis application and the trust account statement appended thereto. Plaintiff shall explain the source of the cash deposits to his account and whether he expects to continue to receive funds from those or any other sources. Plaintiff is cautioned that Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 provides for imposition of sanctions on parties who intentionally file false information with the court.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty days from the date of this order plaintiff shall file an affidavit explaining the discrepancies between his in forma pauperis application and the trust account statement appended thereto. Plaintiff's failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

20111117

© 1992-2011 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.