DAVIS v. ZATECKY
Plaintiff: TERRY DAVIS
Defendant: ZATECKY
Miscellaneous: PENDLETON CF (Court Use Only)
Case Number: 1:2015cv01206
Filed: July 31, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Tim A. Baker
Presiding Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
February 3, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 179 ORDER - GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 167 MOTION IN LIMINE Limine. The Defendants' Motion in Limine is granted as to the following categories of evidence: (1) any testimony or evidence related to unrelated complaints, or discipline, or any lawsuits against the Defendants or other State employees; (2) any settlement or settlement negotiations between the parties, whether of this case or any other case; (3) the source of money to pay any damages that may be awarded; (4) any me ntion that defense lawyers work on behalf of the State of Indiana; (5) any allegation of misconduct by State agencies not related to the allegations in this case; (6) any evidence or argument about the Defendants' alleged failure to call witn esses or present evidence; (7) any "golden rule" argument; (8) any evidence related to attorneys' fees; and (9) any evidence regarding diagnosis or causation of any medical condition unless offered through the testimony of a qualifi ed expert. The Motion in Limine is denied to the extent the Defendants seek to exclude: (1) any reference to the summary judgment motion or order and that this Court issued a decision; or (2) reference to mental or emotional damages. For the reasons discussed above, the Defendants' Motion in Limine, (Dkt. 167 ), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part (See Order.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 2/3/2021. (NAD)
September 20, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 134 ORDER DISCUSSING 120 MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT - For the foregoing reasons, Lieutenant Mason's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Dkt. 120 , is GRANTED. The claims against Lieutenant Mason are dismissed. No partial final judgment shall issue as to these claims. The Court will direct further proceedings as appropriate through a separate order. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/20/2019.
May 25, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 41 ENTRY GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT - For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff Terry Davis has failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies with respect to the issues he raises in his Compl aint. Accordingly, the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Filing No. 29) is GRANTED, and Mr. Davis' Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/25/2016.(JLS)
April 22, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ENTRY - The Court has considered the plaintiff's renewed motion for appointment of counsel. The plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel [dkt 39] is denied for the present. If the case continues to proceed, at the appropriate time appointed counsel may become necessary. (See Order). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/22/2016. (JLS)
September 28, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER denying Plaintiff's 15 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; granting in part Plaintiff's 16 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to the directions in the Entry of 9/1/2015 to 10/30/2015. Any request in the plaintiff's mo tion that he be transferred or granted separatee status is denied. The plaintiff may renew any appropriate request for injunctive relief after the defendants have appeared in the action and after the plaintiff has, in a manner linked to the claims which will proceed in this case, given the defendants the "first opportunity" to address the conditions and practices he asserts in this case. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/28/2015. (MAC) Modified on 9/29/2015 (MAC).
September 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ENTRY Discussing Complaint, Severing Misjoined Claims and Directing further proceedings. Mr. Davis shall have through September 25, 2015, in which to notify the Court concering the severed claims. The clerk is designated pursuant to Federal Rule o f Civil Procedure 4(c)(3) to issue process to defendants Blake Thrasher and Lt. D. Mason. The clerk shall add Officer Blake Thrasher and Lt. D. Mason as defendants to this action and terminate defendant Zatecky. Copies to Mason and Thrasher via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/1/2015.(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: DAVIS v. ZATECKY
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: TERRY DAVIS
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 ]
Miscellaneous: PENDLETON CF (Court Use Only)
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: ZATECKY
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?