Lacy Jr. # 141241 v. Duell et al
| George Lee Lacy # 141241, Jr. |
| Randy Duell, Deanna Arksey, Crystal Galvan-Casas, Janice Pleasant, Brooke A. Oversmith, Nanette Norwood, Erica Huss, Betty Goodsen, M. Breedlove, John Prelesnik and Cathy Stoddard |
| 1:2014cv00537 |
| May 16, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Michigan |
| Southern Division (1) Office |
| Chippewa |
| Ellen S. Carmody |
| Janet T. Neff |
| Prison Condition |
| 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
92
OPINION AND ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 87 ; Defendant Duell's motion for summary judgment 64 is GRANTED; Judgment to issue; signed by Judge Janet T. Neff (Judge Janet T. Neff, clb)
|
|
Filing
44
OPINION AND ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 26 ; Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 14 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 18 is DENIED; signed by Judge Janet T. Neff (Judge Janet T. Neff, clb)
|
|
Filing
6
AMENDED OPINION replacing and superceding the Court's July 30, 2014 opinion 4 , which inadvertently omitted Defendant Pleasant's name from the list of dismissed Defendants; signed by Judge Janet T. Neff (Judge Janet T. Neff, clb)
|
|
Filing
4
OPINION; Order to issue; signed by Judge Janet T. Neff (Judge Janet T. Neff, clb)
|
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 Western 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.
