Stuart v. Advanced Correctional Care et al
| Joe C. Stuart, Jr. |
| Advanced Correctional Care, Travis Wright and Annette Behney |
| 5:2016cv03097 |
| April 21, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Topeka Office |
| Atchison |
| Daniel D. Crabtree |
| David J. Waxse |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Defendant |
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
102
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Defendants Advanced Correctional Healthcare, Inc. and Annette Behney's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 90 is granted. Defendants Advanced Correctional Healthcare, Inc. and Annette Behney's Motion for J udgment 96 is denied as moot. Defendants Advanced Correctional Healthcare, Inc. and Annette Behney's Motion to Dismiss For Failure to Notify Parties and Court of Change of Address 99 is denied as moot. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 01/17/18. Mailed to pro se party Joe C. Stuart, Jr. by regular mail. (smnd)
|
|
Filing
86
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Defendant Travis Wright's Motion to Dismiss plaintiff's First Amended Complaint 75 is granted under Rule 12(b)(6). Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 07/13/17. Mailed to pro se party Joe C. Stuart, Jr. by regular mail. (smnd)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER ENTERED: Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel 64 is denied without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 07/06/17. Mailed to pro se party Joe C. Stuart, Jr. by regular mail. (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.
