Barber v. Corizon Health et al
Plaintiff: James Edward Barber, Jr.
Defendant: Corizon Health, Cheryl Price, Hugh Hood and Roy Rodham
Case Number: 2:2015cv00997
Filed: June 15, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Office: Southern Office
County: Jefferson
Presiding Judge: Virginia Emerson Hopkins
Presiding Judge: John H England
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 23, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 174 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - Barber's motions for a new trial and/or amend the judgment 160 & 161 are DENIED. Barber's motion to strike the bill of costs 167 is also DENIED. The court awards Defendants $5,694.71 in costs. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 8/23/2019. (AFS)
March 30, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 82 MEMORANDUM OPINION - For the reasons stated above, the ADOC Defendants motion for summary judgment, (doc. 71), is GRANTED as to Barbers claims against Specks, Miree, and Price, and all claims against Dunn except for claims for injunctiv e relief in Counts I and III; it is DENIED in all other respects. The Corizon Defendants motion is GRANTED as to Barbers claims against Butler and Corizon and as to his claims of deliberate indifference against Dr. Hood for his disconti nuation of Barbers narcotic medication; it is DENIED in all other respects. The following claims will go forward: Counts I and III against Dr. Hood and Dr. Roddam for damages and injunctive relief and against Dunn for injunctive relief only. T he parties are encouraged to discuss alternative dispute resolution, including the potential for mediation. The parties are ORDERED to file a joint status report by April 20, 2018, regarding the status of such discussion and whether they believe mediation would be beneficial to the resolution of the remaining claim. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 3/30/2018. (KEK)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Barber v. Corizon Health 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: James Edward Barber, Jr.
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: Corizon Health
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: Cheryl Price
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: Hugh Hood
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: Roy Rodham
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?