LaVergne v. Stutes et al
| Brandon S. LaVergne |
| N Burl Cain, Herman Clause, Burliegh Doga, Michael Harson, James LeBlanc, J Clary Lejuene, Keith Stutes and Doug Welborn |
| 3:2017cv01696 |
| November 22, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana |
| Baton Rouge Office |
| John W. deGravelles |
| Erin Wilder-Doomes |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
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
127
ORDER : The 108 MOTION to Withdraw is GRANTED. The 107 MOTION to Appoint Counsel is DENIED and MOTION to Return Filing Fee is withdrawn. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 3/10/2022. (ELW)
|
|
Filing
97
OPINION Adopting 95 Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge.The Court declines the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction over any potential state law claims. The plaintiff's claims regarding his conditions of confinement in CCR beginning in October of 2018 are dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1997e(a). All other claims are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 1915A, and that this action is dismissed. All pending Motions be denied as moot. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 9/23/2019. (EDC)
|
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 Louisiana Middle 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.
