Payne v. Gifford et al
| Vincent Payne |
| Nicholas J. Gifford, Linnea Mahlman, Mike Dillow and Nurse Tipton |
| 1:2016cv00514 |
| May 2, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Cincinnati Office |
| SCIOTO |
| Michael R. Barrett |
| Stephanie K. Bowman |
| 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
56
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 55 Report and Recommendation denying 44 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; granting 49 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 9/28/17. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
53
MEMORANDUM OPINION ORDER - (1) Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel and Defendants' motion to strike 38 41 are both DENIED; (2) Defendants' motion to rescind or set aside the Court's 3/10/2017 Order 39 is DENIED, but the Co urt accepts and recognizes Defendants' full compliance with that Order; (3) Plaintiff's motion to amend/correct his complaint 50 is DENIED for the procedural reasons stated, including the lack of timeliness and clear prejudice to the Defe ndants; (4) Plaintiff's motion to compel Defendants to allow him his own copy of a disc containing DVR footage previously submitted to this Court 51 is DENIED; (5) Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to complete discovery, as cons trued as a motion to reopen discovery 52 is DENIED; (6) Notwithstanding the denial of Plaintiff's motions to compel or to reopen discovery, on or before 7/31/2017, Defendants shall file a status report with this Court that states: (a) Whether all DVR footage from the incident was preserved; (b) If any portion of the relevant DVR footage was not preserved, the basis for that failure of preservation; (c) Whether any additional video, or improved quality of video, exists other than that prev iously submitted to this Court as an exhibit to Defendants' motion for summary judgment. In the event that such additional video does exist, Defendants also shall file a copy with the Court and provide access to the Plaintiff. In light of parag raph 6 of this Order and in the interests of justice, Plaintiff is provided an extension up to and including 8/15/2017 in which to file his response to Defendants' pending motion for summary judgment. If Plaintiff fails to file any timely respon se, this Court will consider Defendants' motion unopposed and may grant said motion to the extent it is factually and legally supported. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 7/14/2017. (km)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER granting in part 30 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel, with all overdue discovery (including any remaining document production and Defendant Tipton's responses to interrogatories) to be produced to Plaintiff by Defendants on or before < b>3/27/2017; denying 34 Plaintiff's Third Motion to Compel; denying 36 Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment; denying 33 Plaintiff's Motion to Amend/Correct Complaint. This appears to be a letter rather than a motion; even if construed as a motion, it appears primarily to relate to discovery requests, and fails to attach a copy of any proposed amended complaint or otherwise identify any new constitutional claims or defendants. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 3/10/2017. (km)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
19
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 6 Report and Recommendations. Plaintiff's claims against defendant Mahlman are DISMISSED consistent with the recommendation by the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 9/16/16. (sct)(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.
