Lloyd v. Fries
| Frank L Lloyd |
| Fries |
| WESTVILLE E-FILE(Court Use Only) |
| 3:2016cv00218 |
| April 6, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| South Bend Office |
| LaPorte |
| William C Lee |
| Christopher A Nuechterlein |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
15
OPINION AND ORDER re 13 Amended Complaint. The Court GRANTS Frank L. Lloyd leave to proceed against Sheriff Fries in his official capacity for compensatory and punitive damages for implementing a policy and procedure in violation of the Fourtee nth Amendment which required inmates to share hair clippers without a way to sterilize them between uses which resulted in Frank L. Lloyd contracting Hepatitis C; DISMISSES all other claims; DIRECTS the clerk and the United States Marshals Service to issue and serve process on Sheriff Fries with a copy of this order and the amended complaint (ECF 13) as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); and ORDERS, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g)(2), Sheriff Fries to respond, as provided for in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and N.D. Ind. L.R. 10-1(b), only to the claim for which the plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in this screening order. Signed by Judge William C Lee on 4/11/2017. (Copy mailed as directed in Order)(rmc)
|
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 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.
