HUGHES v. SCHUCK et al
| 1:2009cv01536 |
| December 8, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Tim A. Baker |
| Sarah Evans Barker |
| Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
161
ENTRY DISCUSSING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - For the purposes of this motion, the evidence has been viewed in the light most favorable to Mr. Hughes, the non-movant. It is undisputed that Officer Ash responded reasonably to the threats issued by Mr. Canton against Mr. Hughes before Mr. Canton attacked Mr. Hughes. It is also undisputed that Officer Ash did not display deliberate indifference by not risking his own safety and attempt to break up the fight. However, a reasonable jury who acc epts Mr. Hughes' version of the facts could conclude that Officer Ash exhibited deliberate indifference to a serious risk to Mr. Hughes by failing to employ pepper spray. Officer Ash's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 123 ) is GRANTED with respect to the issue of whether Officer Ash responded reasonably to Mr. Hughes' complaints of threats by Mr. Canton; but DENIED with respect to Officer Ash's response to the attack. No partial final judgment shall issue as to the claims resolved in this Entry. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 2/22/2013. Copy Mailed. (JD)
|
|
Filing
83
Entry Denying Motion for Summary Judgment - Officer Ash's motion for summary judgment [Dkt. 67 ] is DENIED. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 2/13/2012. (JD)
|
|
Filing
72
Entry Discussing Motion for Appointment of Counsel - The plaintiff has through June 1, 2011, in which to respond to the motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth, Plaintiff's 71 Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED. **SEE ENTRY** . Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/19/2011. (JD)
|
|
Filing
44
ENTRY: The court declines to educate the plaintiff in the manner sought previously and again in his filing of September 15, 2010. Without acquiring jurisdiction over the defendant, the defendant's obligation to answer the complaint has not been triggered. If the plaintiff seeks an entry of default against the defendant, he may, of course, request that step. Additionaly The clerk shall include a copy of the docket sheet with the plaintiffs copy of this Entry **SEE ENTRY**. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/17/2010.(JD)
|
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 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
| Search for this case: HUGHES v. SCHUCK et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
