KELLY v. PERSON et al
| RICHARD L. KELLY |
| MANDIP BARTELS, MIKE MITCHEFF, MIKE PERSON and DUSHAN ZATECKY |
| PENDLETON CF (Court Use Only) |
| 1:2014cv01364 |
| August 18, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Sarah Evans Barker |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Prisoner Petitions - 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
56
ENTRY on Motion to Show Cause, Vacating Final Judgment, Dismissing Claims, and Directing Issuance of a New Final Judgement (1:15-cv-400-TWP-TAB per instructions Entry to docket in this case). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/8/2015.(CBU)
|
|
Filing
49
Order Regarding Defense of Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies - The Superintendent has failed to meet his burden of proving that there was an available administrative remedy that Mr. Kelly failed to utilize before filing the instant lawsui t. The Superintendent has failed to come forward with evidence which would warrant a hearing. Accordingly, the Superintendent's motion for summary judgment [dkt. 33] is DENIED and the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies is REJECTED. **SEE ORDER**. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 4/6/2015. (MGG) (Main Document 49 replaced on 4/7/2015) (KR).
|
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.
