Woods v. Lewis et al
| Darrell Woods |
| Jonathan Lewis, Justin Golian, Randy Ochs, Ricky Hays, James Hurley and Alan Earls |
| 2:2016cv00006 |
| February 3, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Hannibal Office |
| Pike |
| Nannette A. Baker |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
55
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Jonathan Lewis's Motion for Summary Judgment 38 is granted as to plaintiff Darrell Woods' Eighth Amendment claims of sexual abuse and harassment, and his First A mendment claim of retaliation, and these claims are dismissed with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Woods' remaining state law claims of negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). An appropriate Judgment is entered herewith. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on 3/19/2018. (CBL)
|
|
Filing
44
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel 31 is denied without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions or, in the Alternative, for Entry of Default 32 is denied. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on July 6, 2017. (MCB)
|
|
Filing
4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. 2 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall pay an initial filing fee of $4.33 within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable to "Clerk, United States District Court," and to include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration number; (3) the case number; and (4) that the remittance is for an original proceeding. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintiff fails to pay the initial partial filing fee within thirty (30) days, without first showing good cause, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice and without further notice t o plaintiff. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as to defendants Justin Golian, Randy Ochs, Ricky Hays, James Hurley, and Alan Earls, the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue, because the complaint is legally frivolous and fails to st ate a claim upon which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as to defendant Jonathan Lewis in his individual capacity, the Clerk shall issue process or cause process to be issued upon the complaint r elative to plaintiffs First and Eighth Amendment claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as his pendent state-law claims. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED, without prejudice, as to defendant Jonathan Lewis in all other respec ts. See 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in his individual capacity and consistent with this Order, defendant Jonathan Lewis shall file an answer or other responsive pleading directed to the complaint, consistent with thi s Memorandum and Order, within the time provided by the applicable provisions of Rule 12(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the Court's differentiated case management system, this case is assigned to Track 5B (standard prisoner actions). A separate Order of Partial Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Jean C. Hamilton on 6/3/16. (KJS)
|
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 Missouri 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.
