Midland State Bank v. United States of America
| Midland State Bank |
| United States of America, U.S. Health and Human Services and The Health Resources and Services Administration |
| 1:2018cv02775 |
| April 18, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| Robert M. Dow |
| Personal Injury- Medical Malpractice |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1346 |
| 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
160
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order: For the reasons stated in the attached Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court enters judgment in favor of the United States. All pending deadlines and hearings are hereby stricken. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama on 9/30/2022. Mailed notice (axc).
|
|
Filing
85
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated in the Opinion, Dr. Osunero's Motion for Summary Judgment 60 is denied. By April 9, 2021, the parties shall file a joint status report stating (1) whether the parties would like a settlement conference with the Magistrate Judge, (2) whether the parties consent to proceeding with trial before the Magistrate Judge, and (3) whether the parties agree to a bench trial, and, if so, whether the parties agree to a virtual bench trial. Signed by the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama on 3/29/2021. Mailed notice (axc).
|
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.
