Doe v. Blackburn College
3:2006cv03205 |
September 14, 2006 |
US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
Springfield Office |
Charles H. Evans |
Jeanne E. Scott |
P.I.: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1391 Personal Injury |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 100 OPINION by U.S. Magistrate Judge Byron Cudmore: Defendant Blackburn College's Motion to Compel Rule 35 Examination 82 ALLOWED. Plaintiff is ORDERED to return the Symptom Checklist to defense counsel by 3/31/2011. She shall bear all expenses related thereto. Plaintiff is also ORDERED to appear at Dr. Duncan-Hively's office for an additional four (4) hours of examination pursuant to Rule 35. That Rule 35 examination shall be completed by 4/21/2011. If Plaintiff fails to fully comply with this order and Dr. Duncan-Hively's examination, her case will be dismissed. See written order. (LB, ilcd) |
Filing 89 OPINION: Plaintiff's 79 Motion for Sanctions is denied. Plaintiff is ordered to return the MMPI to Defense counsel by March 17, 2011. She shall bear all expenses related thereto. Plaintiff is responsible for the cost of the MMPI if the MMPI is not returned by March 17, 2011. Entered by Chief Judge Michael P. McCuskey on 3/10/2011. (MJ, ilcd) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Doe v. Blackburn College | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.