Maddrey v. Correctional Medical Services et al
| Eugene Maddrey |
| Correctional Medical Services, First Correctional Medical, James T Vaughn Correctional Center Medical Grievance Committee, James T Vaughn Medical Responer, Contracted Health Services, Carl Danberg, Perry Phelps, Old Correctional Medical Services, Office of Information on Inmate Medical Services and Joshua W. Martin, III |
| 1:2009cv00216 |
| April 1, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Delaware |
| Prisoner: Prison Conditions Office |
| Kent |
| Unassigned Judge |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
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
6
OPINION AND ORDER - that all grievances claims are dismissed as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1); and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs remaining medical needs claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff may file an Amended Complaint addressing the deficiencies of his Complaint any time within 30 days from the date this Order is entered; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs failure to file an amended complaint within the time allowed, shall result in the case being closed; and it is finally ORDERED that Plaintiffs request for counsel is DENIED without prejudice.. Signed by Judge Joel A. Pisano on 6/24/09. (rwc)
|
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 Delaware 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.
