Mims v. Hardy et al
| Bernard Mims |
| Illinois Dept Of Corrections, Stateville Correctional Center, John Doe, Marcus Hardy, Sgt Prado, D Coleman, Director Godinez, Warden Edwards and Counselor Sanders |
| 1:2011cv06794 |
| September 27, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Will |
| Virginia M. Kendall |
| Prison Condition |
| 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
76
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 6/5/2013.Mailed notice(tsa, )
|
|
Filing
46
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 6/11/2012:Judicial staff mailed notice(gl, )
|
|
Filing
9
WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 11/7/2011: On the Court's own motion, the Illinois Department of Corrections and the Stateville Correctional Center are dismissed as Defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 1915A. Th e Clerk is directed to issue summonses for service on all other Defendants by the U.S. Marshal. The Clerk is further directed to send Plaintiff a Magistrate Judge Consent Form and Instructions for Submitting Documents along with a copy of this order. Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel [# 4 ] is denied, without prejudice. (For further details see Written Opinion.) Mailed notice. (psm, )
|
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 Northern 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.
