FRYE v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
| TIMOTHY KIRK FRYE |
| DR. MICHAEL ALUKER, Dr. BRYAN BULLER, CORIZON HEALTH, INC., Dr. RICHARD HINCHMAN, INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, STANLEY KNIGHT, Dr. CARL KUENZLI, TIM PHEGLEY, MIKE RAINES and BRIAN SMITH |
| PUTNAMVILLE CF (Court Use Only) |
| 2:2017cv00042 |
| January 27, 2017 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Terre Haute Office |
| Mark J. Dinsmore |
| Larry J. McKinney |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 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
7
ENTRY Discussing Complaint, Dismissing Insufficient Claims, and Directing Service of Process - The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c) to issue process to defendants Corizon Health, Inc., Dr. Richard L. Hinchman, Dr. Michael A luker, Dr. Carl Kuenzli, and Dr. Bryan Buller in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). The plaintiff shall report any changes of address within seven (7) days. The clerk shall update the docket to reflect the dismissal of the claims against the Indiana Department of Correction, Superintendent Stanley Knight, Superintendent Brian Smith, Assistant Superintendent Tim Phegley, and Assistant Superintendent Mike Raines (SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge Larry J. McKinney on 2/1/2017.(DW)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
