Vreeland v. Fisher et al
| Delmart E.J.M. Vreeland, II |
| Thomas C. Fisher, Rene Jordan, Susan M. Tiona, Director of CDOC Pharmacy, Destin Foree, Brian Hoffmann, Mary Ann Aldrich, Robert Magnuson, Gina Nelson, Anita Normandy, Rebecka Wilson, Jody Sinker, Two Unknown CDOC Pharmacy Staff, Colorado Department of Corrections, Correctional Health Partners, Inc., Mark Wienpahl, S. Tateosian, Law Firm of Cain & White, LLP, The, Craig W. Cain, Jennifer L. White and Documart, Inc. |
| 1:2017cv01580 |
| June 28, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| Fremont |
| Gordon P. Gallagher |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
468
ORDER by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 6/3/2021, re: 458 plaintiff's Objection to ECF 456 Issued on 2/26/2021 But Not Received Until 3/5/2021 is OVERRULED.(sphil, )
|
|
Filing
461
ORDER by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 3/24/2021, re: 432 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Pleadings and to Vacate all Court Orders IssuedAfter April 5, 2019 and the Court's Receipt of ECF 293 is DENIED; 455 The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews is ACCEPTED.(sphil, )
|
|
Filing
454
ORDER by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 2/3/2021, re: 417 The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews is ACCEPTED; 410 Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Hearing and Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 65 Injunction is DENIED AS MOOT. (sphil, )
|
|
Filing
451
ORDER by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 1/22/2021. ORDERED that the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews [Docket No. 420] is ACCEPTED. It is further ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint to Conform to Evidence [Doc ket No. 387] is DENIED. ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion to Address Service of Complaint on all Parties [Docket No. 396] is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that plaintiffs Objection to Magistrate Recommendation ECF 420 as to ECF 387 Motion to Amend Complaint and ECF 396 Motion to Effect Service [Docket No. 430] is OVERRULED. (sphil, ) Modified on 1/22/2021 to edit text. (sphil, ).
|
|
Filing
340
ORDER by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 9/23/2019, re: 319 the Recommendation Re: Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is ADOPTED. ORDERED that Plaintiff's Response to the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews Re: Def endant's Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 331], construed as an objection, is OVERRULED; 256 the Motion to Dismiss in Part Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint 256 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as consistent with this order. ORDERED that all claims against defendants Rene Jordan, Anita Normandy, andJody Sinker are DISMISSED because the claims were previously dismissed with prejudice. ORDERED that the Eighth Amendment claims against Gina Nelson, Dolf Hall, and Theodore Laurence are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim. ORDERED that the First and Fourteenth Amendment claims against Gina Nelson, Dolf Hall, and Theodore Laurence are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim. ORDERED that defendants Rene Jordan, Anita Normandy, Jody Sinker, Gina Nelson, Dolf Hall, and Theodore Laurence are dismissed from this case. ORDERED that the Eighth Amendment claims against Susan Tiona areDISMISSED IN PART as barred by the statute of limitations. ORDERED that plaintiff may proceed on his First and Fourteenth Amendmentclaim against Susan Tiona on a theory of First Amendment retaliation. (sphil, )
|
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 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.
