Shepard v. Godinas et al
| Milton Shepard |
| Antonio Godinas, Devin Wright, Campbell, Steven Hall, Trueblood, Wilbur, Joseph . Smith and Gregory Ellison |
| 2:2016cv02087 |
| April 4, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Urbana Office |
| Vermilion |
| Sue E. Myerscough |
| 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
6
MERIT REVIEW OPINION: Pursuant to its merit review of the Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court finds that Plaintiff states constitutional claims for placing him at or refusing to remove him from a substantial risk of serious harm from as sault, attempting to push Plaintiff's face and head into a glass window without justification, retaliation for Plaintiff's resistance to allowing his head to be slammed into a glass wall and possibly for Plaintiff's complaints and grie vances, excessive restraints during Plaintiff's stay at the hospital, and cruel and unusual punishment for forcing Plaintiff to stand with his head down and bent over for two hours during the cadet training. The Clerk is to attempt service on D efendants pursuant to the standard procedures. The Clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. SEE WRITTEN OPINION. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 4/29/2016. (MJ, 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.
