ERICSON v. MAGNUSSON et al
| ERIC ERICSON |
| MARTIN MAGNUSSON, JOSEPH PONTE, PATRICIA BARNHART, SCOTT BURNHEIMER, CORIZON, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, PENNY BAILEY, DAVID GEORGE, CARROL GIFFORD, ANTHONY MENDEZ, KENNY FEARON, RUSSELL, TOBEY, WOOSTER, JOHN DOES 1-10, CARL, SIMEONE, GERRISH and DUPERRE |
| 2:2012cv00178 |
| June 4, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Maine |
| Portland Office |
| Cumberland |
| MARGARET J. KRAVCHUK |
| JOHN A. WOODCOCK |
| 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
90
ORDER denying 55 Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint; denying 59 Motion for Reconsideration; dismissing as moot 61 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; granting 74 Motion for Summary Judgment; dismissing as moot 77 Motion for Ruling; dismissing as moot 87 Motion for Subpoenas. By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (MFS)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER affirming Report and Recommended Decision re 37 Report and Recommendations; granting in part and denying in part 22 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting 30 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 41 Motion to Amend. By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (jgw)
|
|
Filing
33
ORDER adopting 29 Report and Recommended Decision for 16 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and 25 Motion for TRO filed by ERIC ERICSON; denying 16 Motion for Preliminary Injuncition; denying 25 Motion for TRO. By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (MFS)
|
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 Maine 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.
