Strope v. Rice et al
| Michael Lee Strope |
| Elizabeth Rice, Roger Werholtz, Ray Roberts, James B Haydon, Lena Pond, Dale R Call and S Galloway |
| 5:2008cv03300 |
| December 15, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition) Office |
| Butler |
| Sam A. Crow |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 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:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
57
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 55 Motion for Reconsideration Signed by District Judge Sam A. Crow on 9/5/2012.Mailed to pro se party Michael Lee Strope by regular mail (daw)
|
|
Filing
53
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: The motion 33 of defendants Galloway and Haydon for summary judgment is granted. Plaintiff's motion 35 for discovery is denied. Plaintiff's motion 37 to authenticate documents is denied as moot. Plain tiff's motion 43 for recusal is denied. Plaintiff's motion 44 to file a supplemental complaint is denied without prejudice. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 2/9/2012. (Mailed to pro se party Michael Lee Strope by regular mail.) (smnd)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER ENTERED: The motion 19 of the Department of Corrections for an extension of time to and including October 13, 2010, to file the Martinez report in this action is granted. Plaintiff's motion 20 to clarify time limits on remaining claims is denied. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 10/04/10. (smnd)
|
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 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.
