Burns v. Buford et al
Plaintiff: Douglas Burns
Defendant: Stacey Buford, Colorado Attorney General, R. N. Wolff, M. Meehan, Ted Laurance, Aasen, Vahil, Tejinder Singh, Rudy Herrera and John Davis
Case Number: 1:2010cv02691
Filed: November 4, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Colorado
Office: Denver Office
County: Crowley
Presiding Judge: Boyd N. Boland
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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
February 4, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 222 FINAL JUDGMENT. Re: Order Adopting January 12, 2015 Recommendation of Magistrate Judge and Granting Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 221 , by clerk on 3/4/2015. (dhans, )
February 3, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 221 ORDER 219 ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Defendants' 213 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. By Judge William J. Martinez on 2/3/2015.(alowe)
July 11, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 196 APPOINTMENT ORDER pursuant to U.S. District Court's Pilot Program to Implement a Civil Pro Bono Panel. By Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer on 07/11/2014. (cbslc1)
July 10, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 195 ORDER granting 193 Plaintiffs Stipulated Motion to Dismiss Defendant Henrique Fernandez. Plaintiffs claims against Defendant Henrique Fernandez., are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Each party shall pay his own attorneys fees and costs, by Judge William J. Martinez on 7/10/2014.(evana, )
February 25, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 175 ORDER granting 174 The Parties Stipulated Motion to Dismiss all claims against Defendant Jeffrey Clemens in the above-captioned action WITH PREJUDICE. Each party shall pay his own attorneys fees and costs. Party Jeff Clemens terminated, by Judge William J. Martinez on 2/25/2014.(evana, )
January 22, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 169 REFILED 168 PROTECTIVE ORDER - refiled to attach protective order, by Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer on 1/22/14. (cbssec)
November 18, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 150 COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer: Motion Hearing held on 11/18/2013. 136 Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is acce pted for filing as of today's date. ORDERED: The court will VACATE the affirmative expert, rebuttal expert, discovery,and dispositive motion deadlines. ORDERED: A Status Conference is set for 12/20/2013 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom A 402 before Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer. FTR: Courtroom A402 - C. Covington. (ccovi)
July 30, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 124 ORDER In accordance with Part III.C. of the U.S. District Courts Pilot Program to Implement a Civil Pro Bono Panel, the Court hereby determines that pro se Plaintiff Douglas Burns merits appointment of counsel drawn from the Civil Pro Bono Panel. it is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall select, notify, and appoint a member of the Civil Pro Bono Panel to represent Plaintiff in this matter, by Judge William J. Martinez on 7/30/2013. (ervsl, )
July 17, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 122 ORDER The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge ECF No. 119 is ADOPTED and Defendant Clemenss Motion to Dismiss ECF No. 84 is DENIED; Defendant Clemenss Objection to the Recommendation ECF No. 120 is OVERRULED; and The stay of discovery ECF No. 110 is hereby LIFTED, by Judge William J. Martinez on 7/17/2013.(ervsl, )
May 24, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 117 ORDER The Magistrate Judges Recommendation ECF No. 116 is ADOPTED in its entirety; Defendants Meehan, Laurence, Assen, Vahil, Singh, and Waskos Partial Motion to Dismiss, Joined by Defendant Wolff ECF No. 87 is GRANTED; Plaintiffs claims for r etrospective declaratory and injunctive relief are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; Plaintiffs claims for prospective declaratory and injunctive relief are DISMISSED as MOOT; The Clerk of the Court shall terminate Defendants Rob Huss and Jennifer Huss as Defendants in this action; Defendants Wolff and Meehan and Claim 2 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; Defendant Vahil a nd Claim 3 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; Defendants Laurence, Assen, and Singh are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE from that portion of Plaintiffs Third Claim for relief that alleges a violat ion of Plaintiffs Fourteenth Amendment due process rights; Plaintiffs Fourth Claim for relief is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; John and Jan Doe Defendants Nurse and P.A.s John & Jane Does at DWCF Infirmary, Person Assigned to Douglas Burns Health Care, Jane Doe Nurse at La Vista Correctional Facility, John or Jane Doe for the Law Vista Correctional Facility Clinical Services, Nurses and P.A.s on the Swing Shift at the Denver Women s Prison, and Jane Does at Denver Womens Correctional Facility and Plaintiffs Claims 7 and 8 are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; This action shall proceed on the following claims: (A) that portion of Claim 3 that alleges an Eighth Amendment Violation against Defendants Ted Laurence, P.A., Dr. Assen, and Tejinder Singh; (B) Claim 5 against Defendant Dr. Jeff Clemens; and (C) Claim 7 against Defendant Henrique A. Fernandez, M.D., by Judge William J. Martinez on 5/24/2013.(ervsl, )
June 19, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 63 ORDER to Dismiss in Part and to Draw Case to a District Judge and to a Magistrate Judge. Denying 61 Request to Rehear Previously Filed Motion for Referral to Mentor Program, Request for Counsel and Waiver of Service. Claim One is dismissed. Defe ndants Stacey Buford, the Colorado Attorney General, and Correctional Health Care Partners are dismissed as parties to this action. The CDOC is also dismissed to the extent Plaintiff brings a claim against that entity, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 6/19/12.(lswsl, )
May 11, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 58 ORDER Denying Motion to Recuse and Granting Motion to Reconsider. ORDERED that the motion titled "Request to Recuse or Disqualify the Judge" 57 is denied. ORDERED that, to the extent the objection 52 sought reconsideration of the 2/13/1 2 order directing Mr. Burns to supplement the record, the request is denied as unnecessary. ORDERED that the motion titled "Motion to Submit Supplemental Evidence in Support of Rule 60(b) Motion" 55 is granted. ORDERED that the motion to reconsider titled "Motion for Enlargement of Time After Expiration and/or for Relief From Judgement [sic]" 18 is granted. FURTHER ORDERED that this action is returned to the pro se docket, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 5/11/12.(lygsl, ) Modified on 5/11/2012 to add additional text (lygsl, ).
February 22, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 51 Minute ORDER denying 50 Motion to waive filing fee or monthly payment. Mr. Burns continues to have 30 days from the 2/13 order in which to comply with all the directives of the 2/13 order, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 2/22/12.(lygsl, )
February 13, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 48 ORDER Directing Plaintiff to Supplement the Record. FURTHER ORDERED that the "Motion to Waive Filing Fee or Monthly Payment" 44 and "Supplemental Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis Under the Original 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and Waive the Filing Fees" 46 are denied. FURTHER ORDERED that the "Motion to Proceed on the Original Record" 45 and the "Tenative [sic] Motion for Subpoenas [sic] at Court Expense" 47 are denied as premature, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 2/13/12.(lygsl, )
June 16, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 31 AMENDED 29 ORDER Denying Motion to Reconsider. ORDERED that the 21 minute order of 5/27/11, is vacated to the extent it denied that portion of the motion Plaintiff filed pro se on 5/25/11 asking the Court to vacate the 10 Order of Dismissal en tered in this action on 3/15/11. FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent the Court dismissed the instant action because Mr. Burns failed, within the time allowed, to comply with the order of 11/4/10 to pay a $15.00 initial partial filing fee, the Or der of Dismissal is vacated. FURTHER ORDERED that the 18 motion for relief from judgment, filed on 5/25/11, which the Court treated as a motion seeking relief from the judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, is denied, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 6/16/11. (lsw, )
June 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER to Cure Deficiency re 25 Notice of Appeal by Douglas Burns, appellant has 30 days to either pay the filing fee or file a 1915 motion with district court by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 06/09/11. (bjrsl, )
June 8, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 29 ORDER Denying Motion to Reconsider. ORDERED that the minute order 21 is vacated to the extent it denied that portion of the motion Plaintiff, Douglas Burns, filed pro se on 5/25/11, asking the Court to vacate the Order of Dismissal entered in this action on 3/15/11. FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent the Court dismissed the instant action because Mr. Burns failed, within the time allowed, to comply with the order of 11/4/10, to pay a $15.00 initial partial filing fee, the Order of Dismi ssal is vacated. FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for relief from judgment, which the Court treated as a motion seeking relief from the judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, is denied, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 6/8/11. (lyg, )
May 27, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 21 MINUTE ORDER denying as moot, Plaintiff's: 16 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; 17 Motion to Supplement; 18 Motion for Extension of Time ; 18 Motion for Reconsideration ; 19 Motion to Stay; and, 20 Motion for Order to Show Cause. This case was dismissed by an order and judgment filed on 5/15/2011, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 5/27/11.(lsw, )
May 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 15 MINUTE ORDER denying as moot Plaintiff's: 12 Motion to Stay; 13 Motion for Leave; and, 14 Motion to Appoint Counsel, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 5/23/11.(lsw, )
March 15, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER of Dismissal. ORDERED that the complaint and the action are dismissed without prejudice, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 3/15/11. (lyg, )
February 7, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER Directing Plaintiff to File Amended Complaint within 30 days by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 02/07/11. (jjh, )
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 Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Burns v. Buford 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: Douglas Burns
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: Stacey Buford
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: Colorado Attorney General
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: R. N. Wolff
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: M. Meehan
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: Ted Laurance
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: Aasen
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: Vahil
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: Tejinder Singh
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: Rudy Herrera
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: John Davis
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?