Keel v. Corizon Medical Services et al
Plaintiff: Jason Andrew Keel
Defendant: Michael Mitcheff
Case Number: 3:2014cv01492
Filed: May 2, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
Office: South Bend Office
County: Miami
Presiding Judge: John E Martin
Presiding Judge: Rudy Lozano
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
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
August 17, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 48 OPINION AND ORDER: GRANTING 33 MOTION for Summary Judgment Due to Plaintiff's Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies by Defendant Michael Mitcheff. Keel's claims against Dr. Mitcheff are dismissed without prejudice. The clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Rudy Lozano on 8/17/2015. (lhc)(cc: Pla)
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 Indiana Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Keel v. Corizon Medical Services 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: Jason Andrew Keel
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: Michael Mitcheff
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?