Imelmann v. Corizon Inc. et al
| Christopher Imelmann |
| Corizon Inc., Rhonda L. Ryder, Dorene J. Smith and Sharon Curtis |
| 2:2015cv10343 |
| January 26, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Detroit Office |
| Branch |
| Mark A. Goldsmith |
| Michael J. Hluchaniuk |
| 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
93
OPINION AND ORDER (1) Accepting In Part And Rejecting In Part the Recommendation Contained in the Magistrate Judge's August 10, 2016 Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 87 ), (2) Granting Defendant Corizon's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. [ 68]), (3) Granting In Part and Denying In Part Defendant Curtis's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 71 ), (4) Granting In Part and Denying In Part Defendant Smith's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 77 ), AND (5) Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Declaratory Judgment (Dkt. 66 ). Signed by District Judge Mark A. Goldsmith. (MarW)
|
|
Filing
78
OPINION AND ORDER (1) Accepting the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation Dated November 25, 2015 (Dkt. 53 ); (2) Overruling Plaintiff's Objections (Dkt. 57 ); (3) Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. 15 ); (4) Accepting the Magistrate Judge's Second Recommendation Dated December 16,2015 (Dkt. 58 ); and (5) Granting Defendant Ryder's Motion for Summary Judgment(Dkt. 21 ) Signed by District Judge Mark A. Goldsmith. (Sandusky, K)
|
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 Michigan 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.
