Ramos v. Correction et al
Jose Eric Ramos |
Department of Correction, Anthony J. Bruno, Arcouette and John Doe |
3:2015cv01444 |
October 2, 2015 |
US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
New Haven Office |
Hartford |
Victor A. Bolden |
Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 98 ORDER denying 96 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; denying 96 Motion to Compel. Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 3/16/2018. (Giammatteo, J.) |
Filing 73 ORDER denying 33 Motion for Default Entry 55(a); denying 40 Motion ; granting in part and denying in part 42 Motion to Appoint Counsel, such that Plaintiff is appointed for the limited purpose of being represented at the upcoming settlment conf erence; denying 51 Motion to Disqualify Counsel; finding as moot 52 Motion for Disclosure; denying 60 Motion for Default Entry 55(a); denying 62 Motion; denying 63 Motion for Default Judgment; finding as moot 21 Motion for Order; denying 23 Motion. Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 3/3/2017. (Ghosh, S.) Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 3/3/2017. (Ghosh, S.) |
Filing 16 ORDER denying 10 Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice and directing the Clerk to perform various tasks. Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 4/25/2016. (Dearing, S.) |
Filing 9 INITIAL REVIEW ORDER re 1 Complaint filed by Jose Eric Ramos. Discovery due by 8/22/2016; Dispositive Motions due by 9/21/2016. Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 2/24/2016.(Dearing, S.) |
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 Connecticut 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.