TOBAR v. LEMMON et al
| WILLIAM TOBAR |
| CORIZON MEDICAL SERVICES, BRUCE LEMMON, VICKI POORE, WILLIAM H. WOLFE and DUSHAN ZATECKY |
| WVCF (Court Use Only) |
| 2:2014cv00390 |
| December 17, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Terre Haute Office |
| Denise K. LaRue |
| William T. Lawrence |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
109
Entry Discussing Motion to Dismiss - Plaintiff William Tobar, an inmate at the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the defendants, medical providers at the Pendleton Correctional Facility, failed to properly diagnose and treat his heart condition. Tobar asserts that the defendants' actions amounted to deliberate indifference in violation of Tobar's Eighth Amendment rights. Defendant Mike Smith moves to dismiss the claims against him arguing that Tobar does not allege that he was personally involved in the acts alleged in the amended complaint or that he was deliberately indifferent to Tobar's medical needs. Tobar has not responded to the motion to dismiss. Defendant Mike motion to dismiss [dkt 94 ] is granted and Tobar's claims against him are dismissed. No partial final judgment shall issue as to the claims resolved in this Entry. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 9/22/2016. (BRR)
|
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 Indiana Southern 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
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.
