Rutherford v. Warden, Southern Ohio Correctional Facility et al
| Kenneth J. Rutherford, Jr. |
| Warden, Southern Ohio Correctional Facility, Charlie Williamson, Sweeny, Larry Greene, Lewis, Joiner, Brian Nolan, Distel, Butterbaugh, Randy Jackson, B. Ahmed and William Cool |
| 1:2015cv00164 |
| March 6, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Cincinnati Office |
| SCIOTO |
| Michael R. Barrett |
| Karen L. Litkovitz |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
115
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 113 Report and Recommendation denying 80 Motion for Injunctive Relief. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 6/27/17. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
113
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that plaintiff's 80 MOTION for injunctive relief be Denied. Objections to R&R due by 6/23/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 6/9/2017. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER denying 74 plaintiff's motion to find attorney-client privilege misconduct, and denying defendants' 82 Motion to Strike. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 6/7/2017. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
100
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 86 Report and Recommendation denying 65 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 5/3/17. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
86
ORDER that defendant Jackson's 70 Motion for Leave to File an answer to the amended complaint instanter is Granted. The Clerk of Court is Directed to file defendant Jackson's answer. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that plaintiff's 65 MOTION for Default Judgment be Denied. ( Objections to R&R due by 4/19/2017). Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 4/5/2017. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER granting Ohio Attorney General's 45 Motion for leave to file the exhibits in support of the proposed motion to withdraw under seal. However, the motion to withdraw as counsel must be filed on the public docket of the Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 8/16/2016. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 20 Report and Recommendation denying ]7] Motion for Leave to file an Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 8/21/15. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER that plaintiff's 7 Motion for leave to file an amended complaint is Granted to the extent that plaintiff may proceed with claims alleged in his proposed amended complaint against defendants Jackson, Ahmed, Joiner, Sweeny, Lewis, Distel and Butterbaugh in their individual capacities. The proposed amended complaint alleging those claims 19 , hereby supplants plaintiff's original complaint. The defendants who have been served and have entered appearances in this case are Order ed to respond to the claims alleged in the amended complaint that have been allowed to proceed within (21) days of the date of filing of this Order. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that plaintiff's 7 MOTION for leave to file an amended complaint be Denied to the extend that plaintiff seeks in the proposed 19 amended complaint to bring "official capacity" claims for damages against defendants Jackson, Ahmed, Joiner, Sweeny, Lewis, Distel and Butterbaugh; to add ODRC as a defendan t; and to reinitiate a claim against Charlie Williamson, who was previously dismissed as a named defendant in this action 5 15 . ( Objections to R&R due by 7/2/2015). Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 6/15/2015. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 5 Report and Recommendation; defendants Morgan, Green, Col, Nolan and Williamson are dismissed as named Defendants; any ruling re 7 Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint shall be made by the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 5/18/15. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 3/23/15. The United States Marshal shall serve a copy of the complaint, summons, the separate Order issued this dated granting the plaintiff in forma pauperis stat us, and this Order and Report and Recommendation upon the following defendants as directed by the Plaintiff: "Dr. B. Ahmed"; "Nurse Mrs. Joiner"; Randy Jackson; Officer Sweeny; Officer Lewis; Officer Distel; and Officer Butterball. Objections to R&R due by 4/9/2015. (eh1)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
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 Ohio Southern 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.
