BAILEY v. ROBBINS
| CHRISTOPHER BAILEY |
| DUSTIN ROBBINS |
| WVCF (Court Use Only) |
| 2:2015cv00272 |
| September 8, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Terre Haute Office |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| William G. Hussmann |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
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
64
Entry Granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Directing Entry of Final Judgment - This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action was filed on September 8, 2015. The plaintiff is Christopher Bailey ("Mr. Bailey"), an inm ate who at all relevant times was confined at the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility ("Wabash"). The defendant is Correctional Officer Dustin Robbins. Mr. Bailey alleges that Officer Robbins placed him in danger and violated his Eighth Amendment rights when he released another offender from a cell at a time when the plaintiff was supposed to be the only offender out of his cell. The other offender assaulted Mr. Bailey. Mr. Bailey seeks compensatory damages. The defendant seeks r esolution of the plaintiff's claims through summary judgment. Defendant Dustin Robbins is entitled to summary judgment on Mr. Bailey's claim of deliberate indifference. Accordingly, the defendant's motion for summary judgment, dkt. 53 , is granted. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 7/19/2017.(RSF)
|
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.
