Weavel v. Thompson et al
| Joe Don Weavel |
| LaDonna H. Thompson and Brad Adams |
| 4:2012cv00091 |
| August 10, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
| Owensboro Office |
| Hopkins |
| Joseph H. McKinley |
| 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
19
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr., granting 17 Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss and denying as moot 13 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court will dismiss the action by separate Order. cc: Plaintiff, pro se; counsel (JLS)
|
|
Filing
8
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr on 1/22/13; The official-capacity claims for damages against Defendants Thompson and Adams are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Eighth Am endment claim of being denied medical care and a medical transfer will continue against Defendants Thompson and Adams in their individual capacities for damages and injunctive relief and in their official capacities for injunctive relief and his Four teenth Amendment claims of being denied pay and work credit will continue against Defendant Thompson in her individual capacity for damages. The Court will enter a separate Scheduling Order governing the development of the continuing claims. cc:Plaintiff (pro se), Defendants, General Counsel-JPSC (JBM)
|
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 Western 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.
