RICHARDS v. MITCHEFF et al
| DANNY R. RICHARDS |
| MS. JANE DOE, N.P., MS. GONZALES, N.P., DR. HIRSCHLER, M.D., MS. CARRIE JOHNSON, H.C.A, DR. M. MITCHEFF, M.D. and DR. SHARMA, MD |
| 1:2010cv01583 |
| December 7, 2010 |
| 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 |
| 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
144
Entry - Discussing Motions for Summary Judgment; The motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Dr. Sharma, MD [Dkt. No. 112] and the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Michael Mitcheff, D.O., Richard Hirschler, M.D., Taris Gonzalez, N.P., and Carrie Johnson, H.C.A. [Dkt. No. 113] are granted. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 6/25/2013. Copy Mailed. (CKM)
|
|
Filing
76
ORDER Discussing Post-Judgment Motions of Plaintiff Danny Richards; denying 56 Motion to Reconsider; denying 57 Motion to Amend/Correct; denying 58 Motion to Amend/Correct (S.O.) cm. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 10/19/2011. (MAC)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER granting Defendant Dr. Sharma's 31 Motion to Dismiss. No partial final judgment shall issue at this time as to the claim(s) resolved in this Entry. (S.O.) cm. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 8/22/2011. (MAC)
|
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
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.
