Odom v. Meko et al
| Glenn D. Odom, II |
| Joseph P. Meko, Barker, Unknown Cell Entry Team, Faith Doe, Jane Doe and LaDonna Thompson |
| 0:2012cv00109 |
| December 26, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Ashland Office |
| Lyon |
| PSO |
| Henry R. Wilhoit |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
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
97
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) the Magistrate Judge's R&R DE 95 is hereby APPROVED and ADOPTED as and for the Court's opinion; and (2) Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis DE 93 be OVERRULED. Signed by Judge Henry R. Wilhoit, Jr on 6/16/15.(KSS)cc: COR, 6CCA, Odom (via US Mail)
|
|
Filing
90
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; 1) adopting Report and Recommendations re 85 Report and Recommendations. 2) denying 81 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis; denying 82 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis; 3) court finds that any appeal sought would not be in good faith. Signed by Judge Henry R. Wilhoit, Jr on 1/13/15.(SMT)cc: COR, Odom via USMail
|
|
Filing
62
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; 1) adopting 60 Report and Recommendations as and for the court's opinion and 2) denying 59 plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment;. Signed by Judge Henry R. Wilhoit, Jr on 4/7/14.(SMT)cc: COR, Odom via USmail
|
|
Filing
11
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER, 1) granting 10 MOTION to Amend/Correct 1 Complaint (Referred) and clerk shall docket DE No. 10 as Amended Complaint 2) Odom's claims asserted against Meko, Barker, unknown members of LSCC Cell Entry Team ; LSCC Nurse Faith, the unknown LSCC 2nd Shift Licensed Nurse Practitioner; and LaDonna Thompson in their official capacities are DISMSSED WITH PREJUDICE 3) Odom's claims asserted against all named dfts pursuant to a) 42 USC 1985(3) b) 42 USC 10 841 c) 42 USC 12101 and d) 29 USC 794 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE 4) Odom's 42 USC 1983 Eighth Amd claims asserted against Meko Thompson in their individual capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE 5) Odom's req for inj relief is DENIED AS MOOT 6) dfts listed as Sergent "Barker" and Nurse "Faith" must resp to Eighth Amd claims against them in their individual capacities 7) Odom must ID any known John/Jane Doe and have them served w/in 120 days after this MO&O, or cl aims against them will be dismissed 8) clerk shall forward by cert mail RRR one copy of Comp and Amend Comp and this MO&O to Gen Cnsl, Frankfort, KY and Counsel shall have 20 dys to complete and file a notice of waiver of service against any or all d fts; if a waiver is not filed clerk shall submit the record for consideration 9) the answer to comp shall be filed no later than 60 days after waiver is filed; however if svc is req as to any dft court will enter order directing USMS to effectuate se rvice of process and answer must be filed NLT 20 dys after service 10) Odom keep clerk informed of current mailing address and failure may result in dismissal of case 11) for every futher pldg Odom submits for consideration he shall serve dft or coun sel and send original papers to clerk w/certificate of service; if Judge or Mag Judge receives any document which has not been filed with clerk or has been filed but not include a cert of service will disregard the document. Signed by Judge Henry R. Wilhoit, Jr on 7/9/13.(SMT)cc: COR, Odom via USMail, Gen Cnsl by cert mail with DE 1 and 10
|
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 Kentucky Eastern 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.
