CRAIG v. HOBSON et al
| LARRY CRAIG |
| RICHARD BROWN, KIM HOBSON, RHONDA KLAIBER, MIKE LYDAY, CHRIS NICHOLSON, CHELSEY PEARISON, NAVEEN RAJOLI and ASHLEY SWAY |
| WVCF (Court Use Only) |
| 2:2017cv00220 |
| May 12, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Terre Haute Office |
| Matthew P. Brookman |
| William T. Lawrence |
| 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
91
Order Granting Defendant Chris Nicholson's Motion for Summary Judgment, Denying Plaintiff Larry Craig's Motion for Summary Judgment, and Directing Entry of Final Judgment - Plaintiff Larry Craig brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that he failed to receive appropriate medical care for his broken foot. Dkt. 2 . Mr. Craig has not identified a genuine issue of material fact as to his remaining claims in this case and defendant Chris Nicholson is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Therefore, Chris Nicholson's motion for summary judgment, Dkt. No. 55 , is granted. Mr. Craig's motions for summary judgment, Dkt. Nos. 67 and 88 , are denied. Judgment consistent with this Order shall now issue. (See Order.) Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 11/7/2018. (DMW)
|
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.
