Palmer v. Nick Ludwick, et al
| Emmanuel Palmer |
| Barbra Hessbrook, Flore, Autumn Ramatz, Harrington, Jackson, Cheopelo, Beaurgard, G. Thelen, Patricia Caruso, Hensley, Shaw and Nick Ludwick |
| 2:2009cv14642 |
| November 30, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Detroit Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Lawson |
| Majzoub |
| Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
106
OPINION and ORDER Adjudicating Affirmative Defense of Exhaustion of Remedies Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (SJa)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER Adopting 82 Report and Recommendation Granting in Part and Denying in Part 70 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Shaw, G. Thelen, Beaurgard, Hensley, Barbra Hessbrook, Flore and Continuing Order of Reference. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (DTof)
|
|
Filing
80
OPINION AND ORDER rejecting 64 Report and Recommendation; sustaining 68 Plaintiff's objections; denying 61 Motion for Summary Judgment and continuing 5 Order of Reference. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (DTof)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation, granting in part and denying in part 22 Motion for Summary Judgment,,, filed by Shaw, G. Thelen, Nick Ludwick, Autumn Ramatz, Jackson, Harrington, Hensley, Barbra Hessbrook, Flore, Beaurgard, 32 Report and Recommendation Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (PPau)
|
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.
