Gholson et al v. United States et al
| 3:2004cv00838 |
| November 16, 2004 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| East St. Louis Office |
| J. Phil Gilbert |
| Clifford J. Proud |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
135
CLERK'S JUDGMENT (NJR/dka) on Count 2 in favor of Baake, Doctor Lyle, Lieutenant Lockrige against Jimmie Gholson.Approved by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 10/19/09. (dka, )
|
|
Filing
132
ORDER denying 126 Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's previous orders denying him access to the January 5, 2004, videotape. Signed by Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud on 10/6/09. (amv)
|
|
Filing
116
ORDER denying 115 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud on 6/2/09. (amv)
|
|
Filing
114
ORDER denying 108 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud on 5/20/09. (amv)
|
|
Filing
99
ORDER directing Plaintiff to file a Response regarding 98 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud on 2/17/09. (amv)
|
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 Southern 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
| Search for this case: Gholson et al v. United States et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
