Gomes v. Lake County, Illinois et al
| Alfredo Miranda |
| County of Lake, Wayne Hunter, Scott Fitch, Rozel Elazegui, Hargurmukh Singh, Mark Curran and Correct Care Solutions |
| 1:2012cv04439 |
| June 7, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Lake |
| Sharon Johnson Coleman |
| Other 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
450
MOTION by Defendants Rozel Elazegui, Hargurmukh Singh for judgment RENEWED MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 50(b) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 59 (Schoonveld, Eric)
|
|
Filing
212
MOTION by Defendants Jennifer Bibbiano, Correct Care Solutions, Rozel Elazegui, Edith Jones, Ruth Muruu, Hargurmukh Singh for judgment (Medical Defendants' Motion for Judgement as a Matter of Law on Plaintiff's Wrongful Death and Deliberate Indifference Claims) (Vogt, Robert)
|
|
Filing
161
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Sharon Johnson Coleman on 4/4/2016:Mailed notice(rth, )
|
|
Filing
60
WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert on 5/15/2013: Motion hearing held on 5/15/13 on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant CCS to Respond to Discovery [Dkt.# 54 ] and Defendants' Motion for Protective Order Coverin g Non-Party Medical and Mental Health Care Information and Records [Dkt.# 52 ]. For the reasons stated on the record and summarized (and to some extent clarified) in this Order, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel [Dkt.# 54 ] is granted in part and en tered and continued in part, and Defendants' Motion for Protective Order [Dkt.# 52 ] is denied in part and entered and continued in part, all subject to certain conditions described below. (See Statement below for further details.) The parties will file on or before 5/28/13 simultaneous briefs on the issue identified at the conclusion of the hearing whether, under the circumstances of this case, redacting the names of third party inmate-patients from mental health and/or medical records produced by Defendants is sufficient to protect the psychotherapist-patient privilege if the Court were to require the production of documents containing or revealing private communications between the inmate-patients and their mental healthcare provider. Mailed notice(mr, )
|
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.
