STEWART v. GILMORE et al, No. 2:2016cv02442 - Document 4 (E.D. Pa. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDWARD G. SMITH ON 7/6/16. 7/6/16 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE AND UNREPS.(mas, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
STEWART v. GILMORE et al Doc. 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CARL T. STEWART, JR., Plaintiff, v. ROBERT GILMORE, Superintendent, et al., Defendants. : : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-2442 MEMORANDUM OPINION Smith, J. July 6, 2016 The pro se plaintiff, Carl T. Stewart, Jr., commenced this action against the defendants, Robert Gilmore, Superintendent, J. Kennedy Business Manager, Counselor Stella, Counselor Thompson, and Unit Manager Mankey, by filing a complaint that the clerk of court docketed on May 16, 2016. 1 Doc. No. 1. The allegations in the complaint generally relate to the handling of the plaintiff’s prison account and issues with the purchase of a bus ticket. See Compl. at ¶¶ 1127. The plaintiff asserts a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and seeks compensatory damages and punitive damages in an amount in excess of $100,000. Id. at ¶¶ 28. The plaintiff did not file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fees to commence the action, so the court entered an order on May 26, 2016, which, inter alia, (1) provided the plaintiff with a period of 30 days from the date of the order to either (a) file an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, or (b) pay the $400 in fees to commence the action, (2) required the clerk of court to send a blank form application to proceed in forma pauperis to the plaintiff at his address of record, and (3) advised the plaintiff that if he did not 1 The plaintiff is suing the defendants in their official and individual capacities. Dockets.Justia.com submit a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee, the court would dismiss the action without prejudice and without notice to him. Order, Doc. No. 3. To date, well over 30 days have passed and the plaintiff has neither submitted a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis nor paid the $400 in filing fees to commence the case. Therefore, he has not complied with the court’s May 26, 2016 order, and the court will dismiss this action without prejudice. A separate order follows. BY THE COURT: /s/ Edward G. Smith EDWARD G. SMITH, J. 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
