THOMPSON v. CONANT et al
Plaintiff: ROGER THOMPSON
Defendant: CATHORINE KEEFER, QAISIN KHAN, CHRISTINA MAXWELL and DR. CONANT
Case Number: 1:2012cv01177
Filed: August 20, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Tim A. Baker
Presiding Judge: Sarah Evans Barker
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition)
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 26, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 92 Entry - Granting Motions for Summary Judgment and Directing Entry of Final Judgment ; Thompson's motion to give ruling [dkt. no 91] is granted. Thompson has not identified a genuine issue of material fact as to his claims that the defendant s were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. The defendants' motions for summary judgment [dkt. nos. 51, 59] must be granted. The plaintiff's motion to oppose entry of summary judgment [dkt. no.69] is denied. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 8/26/2013. Copy Mailed. (CKM)
May 15, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 87 ENTRY - Denying Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction; Thompson does not have the right to dictate which mental health professionals work with him in prison. Nor can he use his motion for a TRO and preliminary injuncti on as a means of challenging a disciplinary proceeding. There is no basis on which Thompson's request to no longer have contact with Ms. Keefer would "succeed" given these circumstances. Thompson's motion for TRO and preliminary injunction [Dkt. 85] must be DENIED. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 5/15/2013. Copy Mailed. (CKM)
October 4, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER denying plaintiff's 13 Motion for Reconsideration for the denial of his Motion for Appointment of Counsel (S.O.). Copy mailed. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 10/4/2012. (MAC)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: THOMPSON v. CONANT et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: CATHORINE KEEFER
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: QAISIN KHAN
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: CHRISTINA MAXWELL
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: DR. CONANT
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 ]
Plaintiff: ROGER THOMPSON
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?