BACOS et al v. CONNER et al
MELSON BACOS |
GARY J. CONNER, ANINDITA RAY and DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER |
3:2014cv00311 |
September 19, 2014 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
Dayton Office |
MONTGOMERY |
Thomas M Rose |
Personal Injury- Medical Malpractice |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2671 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 18 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (DOC. 16 ) - The Court did not commit any error of law in its Order (Doc. 14 ) granting the United States' motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint with prejudice. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration of that Order is denied. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 5/11/15. (ep) |
Filing 14 ENTRY AND ORDER SUBSTITUTING THE UNITED STATES AS A PARTY DEFENDANT; DISMISSING DRS. CONNER AND RAY; DISMISSING BACOS COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE ANDTERMINATING THIS CASE. Defendants' Motion To: (1) Substitute the United States as a Party Defendant for the Two Individual Defendants; and (2) Dismiss All Causes of Action Against All Defendants is GRANTED. Bacos' Complaint is dismissed with prejudice because it was not filed within the FTCA statute of limitations and equitable tolling is not warranted. Finally, the captioned cause is hereby ordered terminated upon the docket records of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, at Dayton. Signed by Judge Thomas M Rose on 2/11/15. (ep) |
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 Ohio 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.