Smith v. Stine et al
| Shyheem Lee Smith |
| D. L. Stine, M. M. Mitchell, L. Gregorey, K. Baker, L. Rosario and R. Blocker |
| 6:2010cv00246 |
| August 16, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| London Office |
| McCreary |
| Pro Se |
| Gregory F. VanTatenhove |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
22
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. Plaintiff Shyheem Lee Smith's Complaint R. 2 and Supplemental Complaint R. 8 against the USP-McCreary defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 2. The motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, motio n for summary judgment filed by defendants D. L. Stine, Warden; L. Gregory, Health Care Administrator; and K. Baker, Nurse Practitioner R. 18 is DENIED as MOOT. 3. The Court will enter a judgment contemporaneously with this Memorandum Opinion and Order. 4. This matter is STRICKEN from the active docket. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 01/11/2013.(KJA)cc: COR, mailed paper copy to pro se filer
|
|
Filing
9
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1)Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21, Smiths constitutional claims against the FCI-Edgefield Defendants (M. M. Mitchell, Warden, FCI-Edgefield; L. Rosario, Health Care Administrator, FCI-Edgefield; and L. Bloc ker, Health Care Administrator, FCI-Edgefield) set forth in Smiths Complaint [R. 2 and Supplemental Complaint [R. 8 are SEVERED from this action and TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina for all furthe r disposition: 2) Smith's constitutional claims against the USP McCreary Dfts Stine, Gregorey, and K. Baker in their offical capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 3) Clerk prepare documents necessary for service; 3) Clerk prepare a "serv ice packet"; 4) Clerk make three sets of copies; 5) Clerk present the Service Packets and copies to USM Office in London, Kentucky; 6) Service of process upon dfts, Stine; L. Gregorey, and K. Baker shall be conducted by the USM in London by se rving a service packet personally upon each of them; USM responsible for ensuring that each dft is successfully served with process; 7) USM must complete service on the named dfts by serving by certified or registered mail; 8) Pla shall: a) Advise t he Clerk's Office of any change in address; b) Communicate solely through notices or motions filed w/the Clerk's Office; c) Every notice, motion, or paper be certified. Court will disregard any notice of motion which does not include this certification. Signed by Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 5/31/2012.(MRS)cc: COR, Pro Se Filer;
|
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 Kentucky Eastern 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.
