Dudley El v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
| Darryl Dudley El |
| Michigan Department of Corrections, Donald Makowski, Kenneth Robinson, Leland Putnam, Carl Maynard, William Bedell, Dennis Royzer, Michigan Department of State Police, Jack Beeson, G S Gray, Evertt Elkins, Gene Bogert, Dan Bolden, Kenneth L McGinnis, Robert Brown, Jr and John Doe |
| 2:2014cv11927 |
| May 8, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Detroit Office |
| Wayne |
| Michael J. Hluchaniuk |
| Arthur J. Tarnow |
| 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
91
ORDER Adopting 89 Report and Recommendation; Dismissing John Doe Defendant; Denying 87 Request for 60-Day Extension and Dismissing Case with Prejudice. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (MLan)
|
|
Filing
88
ORDER Adopting 84 Report and Recommendation; Dismissing Defendant Dennis Royzer. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (AChu)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER Adopting 80 Report and Recommendation and 81 Report and Recommendation. Dan Bolden, Evertt Elkins, G S Gray, Donald Makowski, Carl Maynard, Kenneth L McGinnis, Leland Putnam, Jack Beeson and Gene Bogert dismissed. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (MLan)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER granting 53 Motion to Dismiss Defendants William Bedell, Robert Brown, Jr. and Kenneth Robinson; adopting 58 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (MLan)
|
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.
