DOE v. MARVEL et al
| JANE DOE |
| GREG EWING, KIM HAWKINS, JON MARVEL, SALLY MASSEY, TIM OSBORNE, SHELBY SMITH, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER SNYDER, UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STAFFER AT THE VIGO COUNTY JAIL, DONNIE YOUNG, JEREMY DAVIS and BRIAN DAWSON |
| 2:2010cv00344 |
| December 28, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Terre Haute Office |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| William G. Hussmann |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Both |
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
14
ORDER granting 12 Plaintiff's Second Motion to Prosecute Under Pseudonym. The Court is not, however, on the basis of the current record, authorizing blanket filings under seal, nor closing courtroom proceedings to the public. Instead, Plaintiff can continue to proceed as Jane Doe, and all public filings should refer to her under this fictitious name. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 12/8/2010. (LBK)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER. For the reasons detailed herein, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion to Prosecute Under Pseudonym, without prejudice to refile. [Dkt. 7.] The Court also DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion to Seal Future Filings. [Dkt. 8.] To the extent good cause exists for specific filings to be maintained under seal, Plaintiff should recite that good cause in a motion to seal those filings on a case-by-case basis. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 10/27/2010. (LBK)
|
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.
