Ross v. Adamson et al
| Eugene Ross |
| George Adamson and John Baldwin |
| 1:2017cv07756 |
| October 27, 2017 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Will |
| Thomas M. Durkin |
| Prison Condition |
| 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
88
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order: For the reasons stated in the attached order, Ross's motion for summary judgment on his claim for halal meals 65 is granted. Defendants' motion for summary judgment 72 is denied in part and granted in part. Defendants' motion on Ross's claim for kufi hats is denied, and Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Ross's claims for provision of imams and retaliation is granted. A status hearing is set for October 15, 2021. The parties should meet and confer prior to that date and be prepared to tell the Court how they would like to proceed with the case. Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 9/30/2021. Mailed notice. (ecw, )
|
|
Filing
60
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order: Ross's motion for leave to amend 48 is denied in part and granted in part in accordance with this order. The parties should contact the Courtroom Deputy within the next seven days to schedule a summary judgment conference. See order for further details. Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 9/23/2020. Mailed notice. (ecw, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
