LEWIS v. HOKE COUNTY et al
| ROBERT LEWIS |
| HOKE COUNTY, HUBERT PETERKIN, ABL FOOD SERVICE, SOUTHERN HEALTH PARTNERS, NEKIA REVELS, KEVIN and BERNIECE |
| 1:2017cv00987 |
| October 30, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina |
| NCMD Office |
| Hoke |
| JOE L. WEBSTER |
| WILLIAM L. OSTEEN |
| Prison Condition |
| 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
126
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR on 02/01/2022, that Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration, (Doc. 104 ), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. FURTHER that this court' s Judgment adopting the Recommendation entered September 28, 2020, (Doc. 103 ), is hereby STRUCK and RECONSIDERED in light of Plaintiff's objections. FURTHER that Plaintiff's cross-motions for summary judgment, (Docs. 104 -2 104 -5), are DENIED. FURTHER that Plaintiff's objections, (Docs. 104 -1 104 -6), are OVERRULED and the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation, (Doc. 101 ), is ADOPTED by this court. IT IS ORDERED that Defendants Hoke County, Sheriff Hubert Peterki n, Nachia Revels, Southern Health Partners, and Summit Food Services, LLC/ABL Management, Inc.'s, Motions for Summary Judgment, (Docs. 66 , 69 , 74 ), are GRANTED and that this action is DISMISSED against said Defendants. FURTHER that Defe ndant Kevin Edge's Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. 76 ), is GRANTED in part with respect to Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claims. FURTHER that, to the extent alleged, Plaintiff's state-law negligence claim against Defendant Edge is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, pursuant to the court's exercise of its discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). A judgment consistent with this Memorandum Opinion and Order will be entere d contemporaneously herewith.(Taylor, Abby)
|
|
Filing
101
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE JOE L. WEBSTER on 09/01/2020, that Defendants Hoke County, Sheriff Hubert Peterkin, Nachia Revels, Southern Health Partner s, and Summit Food Services, LLC/ABL Management, Inc.'s, Motions for Summary Judgment (Docket Entries 66 , 69 , 74 ) be GRANTED, and this action be dismissed against said Defendants. FURTHER RECOMMENDED that Defendant Kevin Edge's Mot ion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entries 76 ) be GRANTED in part with respect to Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claims. FURTHER RECOMMENDED that, to the extent alleged, Plaintiff's state-law negligence claim against Defendant Edge be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the Courts exercise of its discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) (3).(Taylor, Abby)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER signed by JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR on 10/24/2019, that Defendants' Motions to Set Aside Entry of Default, (Docs. 36 , 41 ), are GRANTED and that the Entry of Default, (Doc. 29 ), is SET ASIDE. FURTHER that Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment, (Doc. 32 ), is DENIED.(Taylor, Abby)
|
|
Filing
50
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE JOE L. WEBSTER on 10/02/2019, that the Court GRANT Defendants' Motions to Set Aside Entry of Default (Docket Entry 36 , 41 ) and that the Court's Entry of Default (Docket Entry 29 ) be set aside. FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court DENY Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (Docket Entry 32 ). (Taylor, Abby)
|
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 North Carolina Middle 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.
