Quinn v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
Plaintiff: Richard L. Quinn, Jr.
Defendant: Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution, Freeman, Robinson, Free and Gary Mohr
Case Number: 2:2011cv00268
Filed: March 25, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Columbus Office
County: ROSS
Presiding Judge: Elizabeth Preston Deavers
Presiding Judge: James L Graham
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 2, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 59 ORDER - In accordance with the foregoing, the report andrecommendation (Doc. 55) is adopted. Plaintiffs claims forinjunctive relief are dismissed without prejudice as moot, and anyother remaining claims are dismissed without prejudice for lack ofprosecution. Signed by Judge James L Graham on 7/2/2013. (ds)
June 12, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER and REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 12 Amended Complaint: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the Court sua sponte DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT Plaintiff's claims for injunctive relief. Objections to R&R due within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Report. If Plaintiff intends to proceed with this action, he is DIRECTED to supply the Court with an updated address WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on 6/12/2013. (er1)
March 7, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER denying 43 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting Report and Recommendations re 48 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge James L Graham on 3/7/13. (ds)
January 18, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 48 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 43 First MOTION for Summary Judgment: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the Motion be DENIED. Objections to R&R due within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on 1/18/2013. (er1)
July 27, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 42 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 38 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; adopting Report and Recommendations re 39 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge James L Graham on 7/27/12. (ds)
June 28, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 39 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 38 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that Defendants' Motion be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. It is further RECOMMENDED, to the extent Plaintiff seeks to assert it, tha t his retaliation claim be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim and that Mr. Free be DISMISSED as a Defendant. Objections to R&R due within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Report. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on 6/28/2012. (er1)
February 1, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendations re 30 .Accordingly, the Defendants Mohr and Freeman are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge James L Graham on 2/1/2012. (ds)
January 9, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 30 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 4 Initial Screen and 5 Complaint: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that teh Court dismiss Defendants Mohr and Freeman from this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) for failure to timely effect service of process. Objections to R&R due fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on 1/9/2012. (er1)
September 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER denying 13 Motion for TRO; adopting Report and Recommendations re 16 . Signed by Judge James L Graham on 09/09/11. (ds)
April 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER STRIKING 14 Request for Production of Documents. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on 4/29/2011. (kjm1)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Quinn v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Freeman
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Robinson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Free
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Gary Mohr
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Richard L. Quinn, Jr.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.


Why Is My Information Online?