TEJADA v. CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DALE OF LEHIGH COUNTY PRISON et al
Plaintiff: RICKY TEJADA
Defendant: CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DALE OF LEHIGH COUNTY PRISON and CAROL SOMMERS
Case Number: 5:2014cv05604
Filed: September 26, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office: Allentown Office
County: Lehigh
Presiding Judge: WILLIAM H. YOHN
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 Notice of Removal
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 3, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 143 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS MOTION IS GRANTED IN PART. COUNTS XI, XVII, AND XVIII OF PLAINTIFFS PROPOSED AMENDED COMPLAINT, ECF NO. 92 , ARE ACCEPTED AS A SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADING UNDER RULE 15(D). THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL NAME THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL PARTI ES AS DEFENDANTS TO THIS ACTION: WARDEN OF LEHIGH COUNTY PRISON JOHN DOE, DEPUTY WARDENS JOHN AND JANE DOE, SHIFT COMMANDER CAPTAIN JOHN DOE, INTERNAL AFFAIRS OFFICER JOHN DOE, CORRECTIONS OFFICER DAVID EITEMILLER, CORRECTIONS OFFICER REEVES, SERGEAN T KENNETH GLOSE, SERGEANT DEVAN ALLWEIN, AND LIEUTENANT GREGORY THOMAS. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL ISSUE SUMMONSES FOR THE ADDED PARTIES, WHICH SHALL BE FORWARDED, TOGETHER WITH COPIES OF PLAINTIFFS SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADING, ECF NO. 92 , AND COPIES OF TH IS ORDER AND THE ACCOMPANYING OPINION, TO THE UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE FOR SERVICE. THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE SHALL EFFECT SERVICE UPON THE ABOVE-LISTED ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS. THE COURT RECOMMENDS THAT THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVE REQUESTS THAT THE DEFENDANTS WAIVE SERVICE OF A SUMMONS PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 4(D). THE DEFENDANTS, INCLUDING THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS LISTED IN PLAINTIFFS SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADING, SHALL RESPOND TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADING WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS OF SERVICE. THIS COURTS SCHEDULING ORDER OF JUNE 6, 2018, ECF NO. 129 , IS VACATED. PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE ORDER OF JULY 2, 2018, ECF NO. 138 , IS DENIED AS MOOT. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOSEPH F. LEESON, JR ON 8/2/18. 8/3/18 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE AND DEFENDANTS.(mas, )
September 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 38 ORDER THAT THE MOTION (ECF NO. 21) IS DENIED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOSEPH F. LEESON, JR ON 9/30/2015. 9/30/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PLAINTIFF AND E-MAILED.(lbs, )
Access additional case information on PACER

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 Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: TEJADA v. CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DALE OF LEHIGH COUNTY PRISON et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: RICKY TEJADA
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DALE OF LEHIGH COUNTY PRISON
Represented By: STUART T. SHMOOKLER
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: CAROL SOMMERS
Represented By: STUART T. SHMOOKLER
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?