PORTER v. HOGUE et al
ROGER L. PORTER |
HOGUE, ROOFNER, SCHILLINGS, CAMBELL and FINK |
2:2012cv00101 |
January 30, 2012 |
US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
Pittsburgh Office |
Armstrong |
Lisa Pupo Lenihan |
Prisoner Civil Rights (Prison Condition) |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 102 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER granting in part and denying in part 72 MOTION for Summary Judgment. The motion is granted to the extent that Defendants Campbell and Roofner are dismissed for lack of personal involvement. The motion is denied in all other respects. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on March 18, 2015. (kcc) |
Filing 50 ORDER granting 38 Amended Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's due process claim is sua sponte dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 1915A(b)(1). Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on October 25, 2013. (kcc) |
Filing 37 ORDER striking 30 Motion for Summary Judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' shall file a new Motion for Summary Judgment that complies with Local Civil Rule 56, on or before May 15, 2013. Plaintiff shall be allowed thirty (30) days from the date Defendants file their new Motion for Summary Judgment to file an opposition to the Motion which also complies with Local Civil Rule 56. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on April 17, 2013. (kcc) |
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 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.