TUCK v. MILLER et al
Plaintiff: S. TUCK
Defendant: AMANDA COPELAND, ARAMARK CORPORATION and BRANDON MILLER
Case Number: 1:2020cv01633
Filed: June 15, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Presiding Judge: Tim A Baker
Referring Judge: James Patrick Hanlon
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
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
September 30, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 42 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - For the reasons discussed above, Defendants' motion for summary judgment, dkt. 38 , is granted. This action is dismissed with prejudice. The clerk is directed to update the docket t o reflect that Defendant "Aramark Corporation" should be identified as "Aramark Correctional Services, LLC." Final judgment will issue in a separate entry (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 9/30/2022. (DWH)
June 30, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER Granting Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Screening Complaint, and Directing Service of Process - Plaintiff Steven Tuck's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. 3 , is granted. The clerk is directed pursua nt to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to defendants Brandon Miller, Amanda Copeland, and Aramark Corporation in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint, dkt. 2 , applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Re quest for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Order. Mr. Tuck's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. 3 , is granted. His Eighth Amendment claims shall proceed against Brandon Miller, Amanda Copeland, and Aramark Corporation (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 6/30/2020. Copies distributed pursuant to distribution list. (DWH)
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: TUCK v. MILLER 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: AMANDA COPELAND
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: ARAMARK CORPORATION
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: BRANDON MILLER
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: S. TUCK
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?