COBB v. ROSELL et al
| MALCOM D. COBB, JR. |
| MR. ADAMS, MELISSA BAGIENSKI, LISA BERGESON, RN GENIFER BRADLY, BECKY DAVIS, LEEANN IVERS, MR. KEENZLI, NURSE SAMANTHA MCABEE, DR. PERRY, MR. ROSELL, STACY SCOTT, SHAWNA SHELBY, DR. PAUL TALBERT, NP JANE WAMBRI and CARRIE WELDER |
| MIAMI CF (Court Use Only) |
| 1:2018cv00790 |
| March 12, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Doris L. Pryor |
| 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
118
ORDER - GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' 99 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. The Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, (Filing No. 99 ), is GRANTED as to Mr. Cobb's First Amendment retaliation claim and his Eighth Amendment observation cell claim. All claims against Nurses Davis and McAbee are DISMISSED. The Motion is also GRANTED as to Defendants LeeAnn Ivers, Lisa Bergeson, Roger Perry, and Genifer Bradly (correctly spelled Jennifer Bradley). No partial fi nal judgment shall enter at this time. The Motion is DENIED as to Mr. Cobb's Eighth Amendment claims against Wexford, Nurse Bagienski, and Nurse Shelby. The Court will issue a separate order with instructions for the proceedings that will reso lve these claims. The Clerk is directed to update the docket (and the spelling of the parties' names on the docket) consistent with the following: the plaintiff is Malcolm D. Cobb, Jr.; the remaining Defendants are Melissa Bagienski, Shawna Shelby, and Wexford of Indiana, LLC; and all other Defendants are terminated. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 7/2/2020. (NAD)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER SCREENING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. This action shall proceed with (1) Eighth Amendment medical claims against Defendants Talbot, Ivers, Bergeson, Wambri, Bradley, Davis, McAbee, Bagienski, Shelby, Perry, and Merondet; (2) First Amendment retaliation claims against Defendants Davis, Bagienski, and Talbot; and (3) an Eighth Amendment policy-or-practice claim against Wexford. This summary of claims includes all viable claims identified by the Court. If Mr. Cobb belie ves that additional claims were alleged in the complaint, but not identified by the Court, he shall have through September 17, 2018, in which to identify those claims. The clerk is designated pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3) to issue process to Defendants (1) Wexford Health; (2) Dr. Paul Talbot; (3) LeeAnn Ivers; (4) Lisa Bergeson; (5) Jane Wambri; (6) Genifer Bradley; (7) Becky Davis; (8) Samantha McAbee; (9) Melissa Bagienski; (10) Shawna Shelby; (11) Dr. Perry; and (1 2) Dr. Merondet in the manner specified by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint (dkt. 2 ), applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons) , and this Order. The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect that the twelve defendants enumerated in the preceding paragraph are the defendants in this action and terminate all other defendants previously identified on the docket. Fina lly, Mr. Cobb's motion for information, dkt. 8 , is granted insofar as this Order informs him that the complaint has been screened and that process will be issued to the defendants. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/22/2018. (NAD)
|
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.
