Thompson v. Cook et al
Earl Thompson |
Henry Falcone, Mary Ellen Castro, Steven Faucher, Anthony Corcella, Rollin Cook, Jonny Wu, Carlos Nunez, Scott Semple, Deniese Dilworth, Kathleen Maurer and Loreen Williams |
3:2020cv00381 |
March 20, 2020 |
US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
Vanessa L Bryant |
Prisoner Petitions - Prison Conditions |
42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 1, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 24 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Anthony Corcella waiver -- sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020; Jonny Wu waiver -- sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020. (Velez, F.) |
Filing 23 SUMMONS Returned Executed as to all defendants c/o Attorney General by Earl Thompson. (Reis, Julia) |
Filing 22 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Henry Falcone; waiver sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020. (Velez, F.) |
Filing 21 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Mary Ellen Castro; waiver sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020. (Velez, F.) |
Filing 20 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Scott Semple; waiver sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020. (Velez, F.) |
Filing 19 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Deniese Dilworth; waiver sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020. (Velez, F.) |
Filing 18 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Carlos Nunez; waiver sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020. (Velez, F.) |
Filing 17 ORDER denying #15 Motion as premature and wholly devoid of merit. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and 37. Parties' entitlement to discovery is governed by Rule 26 and a court order is not required to obtain discovery. Plaintiff cannot obtain discovery from named defendants who have not been served or whose answer is not even due. Frivolous motions are wasteful of judicial resources and an abuse of the judicial process. Plaintiff will be subject to sanctions if he persists in filing frivolous motions. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 5-7-20. (Bryant, Vanessa) |
Filing 16 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Rollin Cook -- waiver sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020; and Steven Faucher -- waiver sent on 4/23/2020, answer due 6/22/2020. (Velez, F.) |
Filing 15 MOTION for Discovery, by Earl Thompson. Responses due by 5/22/2020. (Velez, F.) |
REQUEST FOR WAIVER of Service sent to Defendants: Loreen Williams, Denise Dilworth, Henry Falcone, Mary Ellen Castro, Scott Semple, Johnny Wu, Anthony Corcella, Rollin Cook, Kathleen Maurer, Carlos Nunez, and Stephen Faucher on 4/23/2020. Waiver of Service due by 5/28/2020 (Velez, F.) |
Filing 14 SCHEDULING ORDER: The Court sets the following case management deadlines based on the deadlines set forth in the Second Initial Review Order #11 . The parties will file a joint discovery status update on the docket by 08/07/2020. All discovery, including but not limited to depositions of expert witnesses, shall be completed by 11/16/2020. Dispositive motions are due by 12/21/2020. If no dispositive motions are filed, the joint trial memorandum (JTM) is due by 01/11/2021, and jury selection will take place on 02/16/2021 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom Three, 450 Main St., Hartford, CT before Judge Vanessa L. Bryant. If dispositive motions are filed, the JTM is due by 06/29/2021, and jury selection will take place on 08/17/2021 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom Three, 450 Main St., Hartford, CT before Judge Vanessa L. Bryant. Counsel shall be prepared to present evidence on any day during the month after jury selection is scheduled to take place. The parties are directed to closely follow Chambers' Practices -- including the deadlines and format of filings -- when completing and filing the JTM, which shall be accompanied by the voir dire questions, jury instructions, and motions in limine. All evidentiary objections raised in the JTM must be the subject of a motion in limine and supported by applicable Second Circuit precedent. The parties' exhibit binders and electronic exhibits, as well as any courtroom technology requests, must be submitted no later than 2 weeks before jury selection. The Court also requests that any courtesy copies sent to Chambers be printed from the docket and contain the header of the Court's electronic filing system. If and/or when the parties feel that a settlement conference before a Magistrate Judge would be productive, the parties may jointly request such on the docket. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 04/17/2020. (Diamond, Matthew) |
Set deadlines per Dkt. 14: joint discovery status report due by 8/7/2020 and joint trial memorandum due by 1/11/2021. (Shafer, J.) |
Filing 13 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Mary Ellen Castro, Rollin Cook, Anthony Corcella, Deniese Dilworth, Henry Falcone, Steven Faucher, Kathleen Maurer, Carlos Nunez, Scott Semple, Loreen Williams, Jonny Wu* c/o Attorney General - 55 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06160 with answer to complaint due within *21* days. *Earl Thompson / IM #305523* *CORRIGAN-RADGOWSKI CORRECTIONAL CENTER* *986 Norwich-New London Turnpike* *Uncasville, CT 06382*. (Velez, F.) Modified on 4/16/2020 to add c/o Attorney General (Velez, F.). |
USM 285 forms together with Summons, Complaint, Order granting IFP reviewed, and Standing Order re: Initial Discovery Disclosures sent to USM for service on all defendants: Rollin Cook, Jonny Wu, Anthony Corcella, Scott Semple, Carlos Nunez, Kathleen Maurer, Mary Ellen Castro, Loreen Williams, Henry Falcone, Deniese Dilworth, and Steven Faucher in their official capacities. Marshals Return of Service on Summons due by 5/6/2020. (Velez, F.) |
Filing 12 STANDING ORDER RE: INITIAL DISCOVERY DISCLOSURES. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 4/14/2020. (Shafer, J.) |
Filing 11 INITIAL REVIEW ORDER. The case will proceed on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against the defendants in their individual and official capacities. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 4/14/2020. (Shafer, J.) |
Filing 10 ORDER denying #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; granting #9 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. If you change your address at any time during the litigation of this case, Local Rule 83.1(c)2 provides that you notify the court. Failure to do so can result in the dismissal of your case.. Signed by Judge William I. Garfinkel on 4/10/20. (Payton, R.) |
Filing 9 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Earl Thompson. (Payton, R.) |
Filing 8 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by Earl Thompson. (Payton, R.) (Payton, R.). |
Filing 7 EXHIBIT A re #4 Standing Protective Order filed by Earl Thompson. (Payton, R.) |
Filing 6 Notice to petitioner re: Insufficiency #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. You must submit a Prisoner's IFP application along with a Ledger Sheet showing the past six months transactions. If insufficiency not corrected Dismissal due by 4/14/2020 Signed by Judge William I. Garfinkel on 3/24/20.(Payton, R.) |
Filing 5 STANDING ORDER ON PRISONER ELECTRONIC FILING PROGRAM Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 03/20/2020.(Fazekas, J.) |
Filing 4 STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 03/20/2020.(Fazekas, J.) |
Filing 3 ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 03/20/2020.(Fazekas, J.) |
Filing 2 PRISCS - MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Earl Thompson. (Fazekas, J.) |
Filing 1 PRISCS - COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Earl Thompson.(Fazekas, J.) |
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 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.