Jackson v. Fahim et al
| Tony Jackson |
| Dr Fahim, Janette Kinkade and Sarah Johnson |
| 3:2012cv00720 |
| June 18, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| East St. Louis Office |
| Will |
| G. Patrick Murphy |
| 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
56
ORDER GRANTING 48 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 09/04/13. (klh2)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that COUNT TWO fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and thus is DISMISSED with prejudice. COUNT ONE shall receive further consideration. The Clerk of Court SHALL PREPARE for Defendant FAHIM: (1) Form 5 (Notice of a Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of a Summons), and (2) Form 6 (Waiver of Service of Summons). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.1 (c), Count II only of Plaintiffs motion for injunctive relief, requesting that personnel at Stateville discontinue serving him soy and processed food, is hereby REFERRED to United States Magistrate Judge Donald Wilkerson. However, an evidentiary hearing regarding the injunctive relief will proceed before Judge G. Patrick Murphy at a later date. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 8/15/2012. (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.
