DYKEMAN v. MCGILL et al
| WILLIAM DYKEMAN |
| MCGILL, WASICK and N.J. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS |
| 2:2014cv05411 |
| August 28, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of New Jersey |
| Newark Office |
| Essex |
| Madeline C. Arleo |
| Susan D. Wigenton |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 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
82
OPINION. Signed by Judge Susan D. Wigenton on 12/18/2018. (sms)
|
|
Filing
66
LETTER OPINION AND ORDER denying 49 Motion to Compel; denying 52 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Steven C. Mannion on 3/6/18. (sr, )(N/M)
|
|
Filing
43
Letter Opinion and Order denying application for Pro Bono Counsel for WILLIAM DYKEMAN. Signed by Magistrate Judge Steven C. Mannion on 8/22/17. (sr, )(N/M)
|
|
Filing
37
OPINION & ORDER indicating that discovery is closed with the exception that Plaintiff William Dykeman is granted leave to serve the eight written deposition questions set forth in D.E. 34-2 upon non-party State of New Jersey Department of Correcti ons Administrator care of Mr. M. Viera, Litigation Liaison at 168 Frontage Road, Newark, New Jersey. the Clerk of the Court shall mail to Mr. Dykeman a subpoena form for Mr. Dykeman to fill out and serve pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 within 21 days of receiving the subpoena. Signed by Magistrate Judge Steven C. Mannion on 5/25/17. (sr, )
|
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 New Jersey 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.
