Sublett v. Brown et al
| Damien A. Sublett |
| Alan Brown, Casey Foster, Cortney Bradly and S. Gee |
| 4:2014cv00054 |
| May 21, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
| Owensboro Office |
| Muhlenberg |
| Joseph H. McKinley |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
131
Jury Instructions. (JBM)
|
|
Filing
8
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. Plaintiff's motions to amend the complaint 6 7 are GRANTED. IT IS ORDERED that the following claims will proceed: (1) the First Amendment retaliation claim against D efendant Foster arising out of Plaintiff being placed in the SMU on May 5, 2014; (2) the First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Brown arising out of Plaintiff being placed in the strip cell from May 8-12, 2014; (3) the Fourth Amendment r ight-to-privacy claim against Defendant Bradley; (4) the Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Cooney, Robinson, Buchanan, and Williams regarding the allegedly unsafe bunk; and (5) the Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Brown regarding the conditions of confinement while Plaintiff was in the strip cell from May 8-12, 2014. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as follows: (1) the right to privacy claim against Defendant Gee is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) since it fails to stat e a claim upon which relief may be granted; (2) the denial-of-exercise claim against Defendants Cooney, Robinson, Buchanan, and Williams is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) since it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be g ranted; (3) the denial of the access-to-courts claim is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) since it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; and (4) Defendant Gee is DISMISSED from this action since all of the claims against him have been dismissed. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to remove Defendant Gee from the docket of this action. The Court will enter a separate Scheduling Order governing the development of the continuing claims. cc: Plaintiff, pro se; Defendants; General Counsel, Justice & Public Safety Cabinet, Office of Legal Counsel (EM)
|
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 Western 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.
