Warren v. Dimas et al
| Robert L Warren |
| James Dimas, Gregg Scott, Liberty Healthcare Corporation, Michael Bednarz, Shan Jumper, Sharlene Caraway, Amy Louck, Shelly Ganz, Kathleen Schroeder, Jennifer Block, Krista Wilcoxen and Nicole Hernandez |
| 4:2016cv04213 |
| October 5, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Rock Island Office |
| Schuyler |
| James E. Shadid |
| Conditions of Confinement |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
7
OPINION entered by Chief Judge James E. Shadid on 3/27/2017. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: Plaintiff's petition to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. 3 . Pursuant to a review of the Complaint, the Court finds that Plaintiff alleges the named Defe ndants violated his Due Process rights by failing to provide constitutionally sufficient mental health treatment during his confinement with IDHS. This case proceeds solely on the claims identified in this paragraph. Any additional claims shall not b e included in the case, except at the Court's discretion on motion by a party for good cause shown or pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. The Clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. The Clerk is directed to attempt service on Defendants pursuant to the standard procedures. SEE FULL WRITTEN OPINION. (JS, 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.
