Barrett v. Ashby et al
| Donnie R Barrett |
| Forrest Ashby, James Christopher Clayton, Sally K Hougas, Joseph P Hankins, Dale E Kunkel, Bierminn, J Roth, S D Carway, S Jumper and Guy Groot |
| 3:2013cv03001 |
| January 2, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Springfield Office |
| Schuyler |
| Byron G. Cudmore |
| Sue E. Myerscough |
| Conditions of Confinement |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
122
OPINION: Plaintiff's motion for an order directing the facility to return to him Plaintiff's declaration, which was purportedly confiscated in a shakedown is denied 120 . However, the clerk is directed to send Plaintiff a copy of the decl aration Plaintiff filed in this case (109-1, pp. 1-25.) Plaintiff's motion for the Court to try to recruit pro bono counsel is denied 116 . Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted 95 . The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff. All pending motions are denied as moot, and this case is terminated, with the parties to bear their own costs. All deadlines and settings on the Court's calendar are vacated. If Plaintiff wishes to appeal this judgment, he must file a notice of appeal with this Court within 30 days of the entry of judgment. (SEE WRITTEN OPINION). Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 3/2/2015. (GL, 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.
