Marsh v. Bellinger et al
| 1:2006cv00464 |
| July 13, 2006 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Buffalo Office |
| Hugh B. Scott |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner 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
82
ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE HUGH B. SCOTTORDER denying 64 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 64 Motion for Hearing; granting in part and denying in part 66 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 77 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 77 Motion for HearingPlaintiff's motions for summary judgment and hearing (Docket Nos. 64, 77) are denied; defendants' motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 66) granted in part (dismi ssing claims against defendants Williams and Pick and claims against all defendants for failure to protect), denied in part (as to remaining claims and defendants, as detailed in the Order). A separate final pretrial Order will be issued.So Ordered. Signed by Hon. Hugh B. Scott on 10/19/2009. (DRH)
|
|
Filing
62
ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE HUGH B. SCOTTORDER denying 61 Motion to Appoint Counsel So Ordered. Signed by Hon. Hugh B. Scott on 5/4/2009. (DRH)
|
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 York 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
| Search for this case: Marsh v. Bellinger et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
