Edwards v. Hynes et al
| Charles Edwards |
| Hynes, Pat Clark, Cottle and Hun |
| 3:2016cv00019 |
| March 28, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia |
| Dublin Office |
| Wheeler |
| Dudley H. Bowen |
| Brian K. Epps |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
106
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Plaintiff's claims against Defendants are dismissed with prejudice. Each party shall bear its respective costs and attorney's fees, if any. This case stands closed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 09/20/2018. (jlh)
|
|
Filing
95
ORDER clarifying the Court's 92 Order assuring Plaintiff that he would still have a jury trial before the Magistrate Judge. If Plaintiff continues to object he must do so before the close of business on July 24, 2018. (Compliance due by 7/24/2018.) Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 07/09/2018. (jlh)
|
|
Filing
91
ORDER ADOPTING the 89 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS as the Court's opinion and grants in part and denies in part 66 (Doc. no. 66-1) Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court grants summary judgment as to Plaintiff's deliberate indifference claim against Defendant Cottle. The case shall proceed on Plaintiff's deliberate indifference claim against Defendant Ahn and retaliatory transfer claim against Defendant Clark. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 06/15/2018. (jlh)
|
|
Filing
90
ORDER directing service of the 89 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS on all parties. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 05/22/2018. (jlh)
|
|
Filing
88
ORDER denying 85 Motion for Reconsideration re 83 Order on Motion for Sanctions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 04/17/2018. (jlh)
|
|
Filing
83
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 79 Motion for Sanctions and denying Plaintiff's request to appoint a doctor. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 03/20/2018. (jlh)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER denying 62 Motion for Sanctions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 10/26/2017. (jlh)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER granting 48 Motion a subpoena. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 2/1/17. (cmr)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDER ADOPTING 16 Report and Recommendations and DISMISSING Plaintiff's claims of deliberate indifference to his ingrown toenail and need for vitamins, Boost, and ibuprofen, all supervisory liability claims against Defendant Clark, and all claims of retaliatory transfer against Defendants Hynes, Hun, and Cottle. The Court further DISMISSES Defendant Hynes from the case, as no claims against him remain. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 01/18/2017. (maa)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER ADOPTING 16 Report and Recommendations, DISMISSING Plaintiff's claims of deliberate indifference to his ingrown toenail and need for vitamins, Boost, and ibuprofen, all supervisory liability claims against Defendant Clark, and all claims of retaliatory transfer against Defendants Hynes, Hun, and Cottle; DISMISSING Defendant Hynes from the case. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 11/16/2016.(maa)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER denying 13 Motion for Reconsideration. The Plaintiff is ordered to amend his complaint within 14 days of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 8/29/16. (cmr)
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER denying as moot 11 Motion to correct. The plaintiff shall have 14 days from this order to file his amended complaint to include all allegations and defendants. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 8/11/16. (cmr)
|
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 Georgia Southern 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.
