Barnes v. Corizon Medical Services (INMATE 2)

Plaintiff: Ronald Dale Barnes
Defendant: Corizon Medical Services
Case Number: 2:2015cv00057
Filed: January 23, 2015
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Montgomery Office
County: Elmore
Presiding Judge: Myron H. Thompson
Referring Judge: Wallace Capel
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983
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
March 31, 2015 24 Opinion or Order of the Court OPINION AND ORDER it is ORDERED as follows: 1. The 18 recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is adopted. 2. The plaintiff's 1 motion for preliminary injunction is denied without prejudice. 3. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/31/2015. (kh, )

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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Barnes v. Corizon Medical Services (INMATE 2)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ronald Dale Barnes
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Corizon Medical Services
Represented By: William Richard Lunsford
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 [ 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?