Ruff v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
James Ruff |
Michigan Department of Corrections, Paul Piper, Correctional Medical Services, Seetha Vadlamudi, Scott Nobles and John Doe |
1:2007cv15443 |
December 21, 2007 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
Bay City Office |
Jackson |
Charles E Binder |
Thomas L Ludington |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
No cause code entered |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 36 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DATED JANUARY 7, 2009, OVERRULING PLAINTIFFS OBJECTIONS, GRANTING DEFENDANT CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING DEFENDANT VADLAMUDIS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DATED APRIL 7, 2009, GRANTING DEFENDANT PIPERS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, VADLAMUDI, AND PIPER WITH PREJUDICE, DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST JOHN DOE WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND AMENDING ORDER DATED JUNE 4, 2008 Signed by District Judge Thomas L Ludington. (JCre) |
Filing 35 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending granting 31 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Paul Piper. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles E Binder. (PMor) |
Filing 32 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending granting 16 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Correctional Medical Services, and recommending granting 22 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Seetha Vadlamudi. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles E Binder. (PMor) |
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 Michigan 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.