Daugherty v. McCluskey et al.
Plaintiff: Mark C. Daugherty
Defendant: Nicky McCluskey, Ludford, Warden Dixon C.C. and Wexford Health Sources, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2018cv50088
Filed: March 12, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Office: Rockford Office
County: LaSalle
Presiding Judge: Iain D. Johnston
Presiding Judge: Frederick J. Kapala
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 12, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 231 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order; The various motions to dismiss the individual defendants (200, 202, 204, 206, 207, 209, 211, 215, 219) are granted. The motion to dismiss Wexford Health Sources 213 is granted in part and denied in part. If during disc overy on the Monell claim against Wexford, Daugherty discovers sufficient evidence under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 to replead against these other defendants, he may file an amended complaint, provided the amended pleading is filed before the cut off contained in the case management order. Upon expiration of the amended pleading date, the dismissals will automatically become with prejudice. See the attached order for details. Signed by the Honorable Iain D. Johnston on 3/12/2021:(yxp, )
February 21, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 186 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr on 2/21/2020: For the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the defendants' motions to dismiss 110 , 113 , 116 , 119 , 122 , 125 , 128 , 131 , 134 , 148 , 160 are granted. As the plaintiff has requested leave to amend in the event of dismissal, and has not had the opportunity to replead in response to a judicial ruling about the adequacy of his allegations, the dismissal is without prejudice. The plaintiff has leave to file a third amended complaint by 3/23/20. Mailed notice(air, )
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Daugherty v. McCluskey et al.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mark C. Daugherty
Represented By: Lori Ann Vanderlaan(Designation Pro Bono)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Nicky McCluskey
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Ludford
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Warden Dixon C.C.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Wexford Health Sources, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?