Talley v. Butler et al
| Durwyn Talley |
| . Butler, John Doe Eye Doctor, . Shoemaker, Cindy Hobrock and Jeffrey Korte |
| 3:2016cv03326 |
| December 20, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Springfield Office |
| Brown |
| Joe Billy McDade |
| 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
13
MERIT REVIEW ORDER entered by Judge Joe Billy McDade on 4/26/2017. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:1) Plaintiff states a claim of deliberate indifference against the Doe Defendant physician. His retaliation claim against the Doe Defendant is DISMISSED, as Pl aintiff is a 3-striker and there is no evidence of imminent danger due to Plaintiff being prescribed bifocal glasses. 2) Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Korte, Butler and Shoemaker fail to allege their personal participation in the alleged violations and these Defendants are DISMISSED. Defendant Hobrock is DISMISSED as Plaintiff has failed to allege any allegations against her in the complaint. 3) Plaintiff's petition for in forma pauperis status 6 is DENIED. Plaintiff will be given 14 days in which to pay the $400 filing fee. The failure to do so will result in the dismissal of this case. 4) Plaintiff's petition to stay these proceedings 11 is DENIED. SEE FULL WRITTEN ORDER.(SL, 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.
