Bell v. Zuercher et al
| Timothy U. Bell |
| M. Zuercher, P. Heffington, C. Linaweaver, M. Batts, A. Evans, Norbert Rosario, P. Curz, S. Slone, Daniel DeOliveira and Cheryl Cothren |
| 7:2010cv00072 |
| June 2, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Pikeville Office |
| Martin |
| Amul R. Thapar |
| Other 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
103
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Motions terminated: Bell's motion to set aside, R. 96 , is DENIED. Rosario and Cruz's motion to dismiss, R. 97 , is DENIED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART. DeOliveira's request to dismiss Bell's FTCA claims against him, Pikeville Civil No. 12-17-KKC, R. 5 at 1, 5, is GRANTED. In accordance with this ruling and the Court's previous rulings, John Zuercher, Phillip Heffington, Dr. Norbert Rosario, and Dr. Daniel DeOliveira remain the only defendants in Bell's Bivens claims. See RR. 73 , 79 . The United States is the only defendant remaining in Bell's FTCA claim. Signed by Judge Amul R. Thapar on 5/22/2012. (RCB)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
73
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: (1) motion to dismiss by Dfts Batts, Cruz, Evans, Heffington, Linaweaver, Rosario, and Sloane, R. 67 , is treated as a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56. This motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENI ED IN PART. (a) Summary judgment is GRANTED in favor of Dfts Batts, Cruz, Linaweaver, Rosario, and Sloane. Summary judgment is also GRANTED with respect to Bell's claims against Dft Heffington in his superv isory capacity. (b) Summary judgment is DENIED with respect to Bell's claims that Dft Heffington was personally indifferent to the July 16, 2009 "cop-out" and letter. (c) Bell has until November 10, 2011, to presen t any evidence or arguments for why summary judgment is inappropriate on these claims. If Bell believes additional evidence will present genuine issues of material fact, she should file an affidavit that identifies what evidence she expects to find through further discovery. If she needs more time, she should file a motion requesting more time and explain why she needs such time. (2) Dft DeOliveira did not move to dismiss or for summary judgment and remains in the case. Similarly, Dft Zu ercher has not yet responded to complaint and also remains in the case. (3) Bell's motion to compel production, R. 69 , is DENIED. However, dfts are DIRECTED to provide the last-known address for Dft Zuercher to Bell no later than November 10, 2011. Signed by Judge Amul R. Thapar on 10/31/2011. (RCB)cc: COR
|
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.
