Wilson v. Larned Correctional Mental Health Facility

Justia Dockets & Filings Tenth Circuit Kansas District Court Wilson v. Larned Correctional Mental Health Facility

Wilson v. Larned Correctional Mental Health Facility

Plaintiff:	Richard Anthony Wilson
Defendant:	Larned Correctional Mental Health Facility
Case Number:	5:2008cv03239
Filed:	September 16, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the District of Kansas
Office:	Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition) Office
County:	Pawnee
Presiding Judge:	Sam A. Crow
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:	42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
July 19, 2011	Filing 72 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: The clerk of the court shall enter judgment on behalf of the defendants. This consolidated action is dismissed and all relief is denied. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 7/19/2011.(Mailed to pro se party Richard Anthony Wilson by regular mail.) (smnd)
June 15, 2011	Filing 70 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: The parties are notified that the court is considering the entry of summary judgment on behalf of defendants pursuant to Rule 56(f)(3). Plaintiff is granted to and including July 15, 2011, to respond to this order and s et forth any ground, legal or factual, in opposition to the entry of summary judgment in this matter. The failure to provide a timely response will result in the entry of summary judgment on behalf of defendants without additional prior notice to the plaintiff. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 6/15/2011. (Mailed to pro se party Richard Anthony Wilson by regular mail.) (smnd)

Date Filed

Document Text

July 19, 2011

Filing 72 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: The clerk of the court shall enter judgment on behalf of the defendants. This consolidated action is dismissed and all relief is denied. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 7/19/2011.(Mailed to pro se party Richard Anthony Wilson by regular mail.) (smnd)

June 15, 2011

Filing 70 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: The parties are notified that the court is considering the entry of summary judgment on behalf of defendants pursuant to Rule 56(f)(3). Plaintiff is granted to and including July 15, 2011, to respond to this order and s et forth any ground, legal or factual, in opposition to the entry of summary judgment in this matter. The failure to provide a timely response will result in the entry of summary judgment on behalf of defendants without additional prior notice to the plaintiff. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 6/15/2011. (Mailed to pro se party Richard Anthony Wilson by regular mail.) (smnd)

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 Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wilson v. Larned Correctional Mental Health Facility
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Richard Anthony Wilson
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: Larned Correctional Mental Health Facility
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?