Gevas v. Ryker et al
| David Gevas |
| Derwin Ryker, Harrington, J Brown, C Vaughn, L Walters, T Cox, R Goins, Hoskinson, J Fenoglio and Wexford Health Sources, Inc |
| 3:2010cv00493 |
| July 8, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| East St. Louis Office |
| Perry |
| David R. Herndon |
| 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
264
ORDER denying 255 Motion to Alter Judgment; denying 255 Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law; denying 255 Motion for New Trial. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams on 9/16/14. (amv)
|
|
Filing
239
JUDGMENT in favor of Wexford Health Sources, Inc, C Vaughn, Derwin Ryker, Donald Gaetz, J Fenoglio, Jeremiah Brown, R Goins, Terrence Cox against David Gevas; and in favor of David Gevas against Nobel Harrington in the amount of $10,000.00. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams on 8/27/13. (amv)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER ADOPTING 65 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, re 53 , GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 53 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Derwin Ryker, Harrington, J Brown, C Vaughn. The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Williamss Report and Recommendation (Doc. 65) except with respect those portions that Plaintiff specifically objected to relative to Defendant Vaughn. Defendants motion for summary judgment (Doc. 53) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART : Defendant Vaughn is GRANTED summary judgment (Doc. 53) and is DISMISSED, without prejudice; Defendants Ryker, Harrington and Brown are DENIED summary judgment. (mmr)
|
|
Filing
38
ORDER Granting 32 MOTION for Reconsideration filed by David Gevas, Granting 35 MOTION to Dismiss filed by David Gevas. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Count 3 is SEVERED into a new case. That new case shall be: Claims against DEFENDANT HOSKINSON for opening legal mail. The new case SHALL BE ASSIGNED to the undersigned District Judge for further proceedings. In the new case, the Clerk is DIRECTED to file the following documents:(1)This Memorandum and Order;(2)The Memorandum and Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge (Doc. 9); (3)The Original Complaint (Doc. 1);(4)Plaintiffs Motion to Reconsider (Doc. 32). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, on or before May 9, 2011, Plaintiff shall file a First Amended Complaint in the new action, which shall contain the count now designated as Count 3 against Defendant Hoskinson, along with any exhibits he wishes the Court to consider. Failure to file an amended complaint in the new action, as well as failure to pay the fee or file a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, may result in dismissal of that new action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Finally, Plaintiff is further warned that if he files another motion to review or reconsider the threshold order (Doc. 9), which has already been considered 4 times, it will be summarily denied. (Action due by 5/9/2011). Signed by Judge Michael J. Reagan on 4/15/2011. (tjk)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams, Stephen C. Williams added, denying as moot 5 MOTION for Threshold Review Instanter filed by David Gevas. Defendants Wexford Health Sources, Inc and J Fenoglio terminated with prejudice. Defendant R Goins terminated without prejudice. It is FURTHER ORDERED that within 45 days of the date of entry of this Order (on or before April 11, 2011) Plaintiff may file a motion to voluntarily dismiss Count 2 and/or Count 4 from this action. If Plaintiff does not do so, the Court will sever each of these claims into a new action. A new case number will be assigned for each of these two claims and an additional filing fee will be assessed for each of these two new cases. Because Plaintiff ha s not sought or been granted leave to proceed IFP in this case, it is Plaintiff's responsibility to serve Defendants Ryker, Harrington, Brown, Vaughn, Walters, Cox and Hoskinson with a summons and copy of the complaint pursuant to FRCP 4. If Pla intiff desires to request the appointment of the USM to serve process on the Defendants, Plaintiff shall file a motion for service of process at government expense, on or before April 11, 2011. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to mail to Plaintiff the Court's Pro Se Litigant Guide, containing forms and instructions for filing said motion. The Clerk of Court is also DIRECTED to complete, on Plaintiff's behalf, a summons for Defendant's Ryker, Harrington, Brown, Vaughn, Walters, Cox and Hoskinson. The Clerk shall forward the summonses and sufficient copies of the complaint and this Memorandum and Order to Plaintiff so that he may serve Defendants. (Action due by 4/11/2011). Signed by Judge Michael J. Reagan on 2/22/2011. (tjk)
|
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
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.
