Solliday v. Director of Bureau of Prisons et al
Plaintiff: Myra Catherine Solliday
Defendant: Office of General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Michael K. Nalley and Director of Bureau of Prisons
Case Number: 0:2011cv02350
Filed: August 15, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Waseca
Presiding Judge: Michael J. Davis
Presiding Judge: Jeanne J. Graham
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 14, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 57 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 56 Report and Recommendation (Written Opinion). The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED; Quintez Talley, Jonathan Rich, Jimmy Thula, and Eddie Breiviks Motion to Intervene 55 is DENIED. An order be issued further restricting the proposed filings of Jonathan Lee Riches (a.k.a. Jonathan Rich, Rich Jonny Lee, Gordon Gekko, Ryan Howard, Mats Sundin, Trevor Wikre, or anyone signing with Inmate Identification Number KX9662) by directing the Clerk of Court for the District of Minnesota to refuse any type of filings submitted by Mr. Riches unless he receives permission to file the proposed document from a United States Magistrate Judge or unless the document is signed by a licensed attorney; Qu intez Talley, Jimmy Thula (a.k.a. Jimmy Thule, Jimmy Jahar Thula, Jimmy James Thule, and James Jared Thule), and Eddie Breivik (a.k.a. Edward Breivik) be forewarned that if they make more frivolous filings in this District, they may be added to the D istricts list of restricted filers; and The Clerks Office mail a copy of this order to each of the Movants at the addresses listed in their Motion 55 . Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 11/14/14. (KMW) Modified on 11/14/2014 (MMP). cc: Pro se Parties on 11/14/2014 MMP.
September 4, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 48 . IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 25 is GRANTED; and 2. Plaintiffs Motion to Amend her Complaint 33 is DENIED. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.(Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 9/4/12. (GRR)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Solliday v. Director of Bureau of Prisons et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Office of General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Prisons
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael K. Nalley
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Director of Bureau of Prisons
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Myra Catherine Solliday
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?