Dunigan v. Coffey et al
| Greg Dunigan |
| Melissa Coffey, Counselor Grott, Wardens, Adjustment Committee, Counselor Ryann, Counselor Nippe, Gail Walls, Officer Ellette, Nicole Lewis, Morgan Teas, Luetinant Pharoe, Sergant Scott, Getting, Lori Oakley, Doctor Furentes, Menard Correctional Center and Unknown Party |
| 3:2015cv01214 |
| November 2, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| East St. Louis Office |
| Randolph |
| Nancy J. Rosenstengel |
| Prison Condition |
| 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
40
ORDER ADOPTING 39 Report and Recommendations and GRANTING 34 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 9/17/2018. (klh2)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson. Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 11/21/2016. (tjk)
|
|
Filing
15
IT IS ORDERED that if Plaintiff wishes to amend the original complaint at Doc. 1, he shall file his First Amended Complaint within 35 days of the entry of this order (on or before October 25, 2016). (Amended Pleadings due by 10/25/2016). Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 9/20/2016. (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.
