HUBBARD v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
| ARAMARK CORRECTIONS SERVICES, LLC, CORIZON CORRECTIONS MEDICAL CORPORATION, JOHN DOE, 1-25, HAMILTON COUNTY JAIL, HAMILTON COUNTY SHERIFF, INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, MARION COUNTY JAIL, MARION COUNTY SHERIFF, THE GEO GROUP, INC, WARDEN and WEXFORD OF INDIANA, LLC |
| BYRON HUBBARD |
| 1:2018cv01229 |
| April 23, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Sarah Evans Barker |
| Matthew P. Brookman |
| 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
231
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT - The defendants' motions for summary judgment, dkt. 197 , dkt. 210 , dkt. 222 , are GRANTED. Mr. Hubbard's motion for court assistanc e, dkt. 230 , is DENIED. Final judgment consistent with this Order, the Screening Order of January 29, 2020, dkt. 83, and the stipulation of dismissal, dkt. 185, shall now issue (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 9/24/2021. Copy of Order placed in envelope for pick up (DWH). Modified on 9/24/2021 (DWH).
|
|
Filing
188
ORDER Denying Motion to Reconsider and Motion to Stay - For the reasons explained above, the plaintiff is competent to litigate the case himself at this time. His motion to reconsider the denial of his motion to appoint counsel, dkt. 183 , is t herefore denied. The Court notes that his motion, which contains numerous requests, violates the requirement of Local Rule 7-1 that "Motions must be filed separately." But the Court will address Mr. Hubbard's request for a stay in a ddition to his request for reconsideration of the denial of his motion to appoint counsel. Mr. Hubbard's request for a stay is denied. However, the parties shall have through December 3, 2020, to complete discovery and January 4, 2021, to file dispositive motions (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 11/10/2020. Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. (DWH)
|
|
Filing
176
ORDER Denying Motion for Assistance with Recruiting Counsel - For the reasons explained above, the plaintiff is competent to litigate the case himself at this time. His motion for assistance with recruiting counsel, dkt. 167 , is therefore denied (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 8/17/2020. Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. (DWH)
|
|
Filing
5
ENTRY - Granting motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, Denying Motion to Appoint Counsel, Discussing Complaint, and Directing Further Proceedings; The plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. 2 , is granted. The assessment of an initial partial filing fee is not feasible at this time. The plaintiff's motion for assistance with recruiting counsel, dkt. 4 , is denied as premature. The Court notes that the plaintiff has named a number of John Doe d efendants, who are employees of the Marion County Jail, the Hamilton County Jail, and the New Castle Correctional Facility. To assist the plaintiff in identifying these defendants, the clerk shall add as defendants the Sheriff of Marion County, the Sheriff of Hamilton County, and the Warden of the New Castle Correctional Facility. The clerk is designated, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3), to issue and serve process on these officials in the manner specified by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(1). Pro cess shall issue to them in their official capacities only, for the purpose of permitting them to appear in the action and respond to discovery regarding the identity of personnel who could be properly named as defendants in this action. Process in this case shall consist of the complaint, applicable forms and this Entry.. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 4/30/2018. Copy Mailed.(CKM)
|
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.
