Norris v. Illinois Department of Corrections et al
| John V Norris |
| Steve Gans, Lyle Hawkinson, . Gossett, Barbara King, Clifford Sangster, Bradly Livingston, Trina Peed, Hill Correctional Center, Illinois Department of Corrections, Gina Allen, Salvador Godinez and Joseph Yurkovich |
| 1:2014cv01176 |
| May 5, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Peoria Office |
| Will |
| Michael M. Mihm |
| Tom Schanzle-Haskins |
| Civil Rights |
| 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
10
MERIT REVIEW OPINION entered by Judge Michael M. Mihm on 6/27/14: Rule 16 Deadline 8/26/2014. The Clerk is directed to: Dismiss all Defendants except Trina Peed; Attempt service on Defendants pursuant to the standard procedures; and set an internal court deadline 60 days from the entry of this order for the court to check on the status of service and enter scheduling deadlines. Lastly, it is ordered that if a Defendant fails to sign and return a waiver of service for the clerk within 30 days a fter the waiver is sent, the court will take appropriate steps to effect formal service through the U.S. Marshal's Service on that Defendant and will require that Defendant to pay the full costs of formal service pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d)(2). SEE FULL WRITTEN ORDER. (FDT, ilcd)
|
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 Illinois Central 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.
