Allee v. Shurbondy et al
| Donald Ernest Allee |
| K. Neill, Mark Nooth, "John Doe" Cortane, Jodean Elliott-Blakeslee, M. Franks, Judy Gilmore, "John Doe" Greybill, M.D. Garth Grant Gulick, Hansen, "John Doe" Hazen, RN Shirley Hodges, "Jane Doe" Jantzen, J. Shurbondy, M.D. Steve Shelton, M. Payne, "Jane Doe" Selves and "Jane Doe" Orozco |
| 1:2011cv00188 |
| February 11, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Medford Office |
| Owen M. Panner |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
60
ORDER: Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings 37 is granted with prejudice. Plaintiff's motions 35 , 36 , 45 , 51 , and defendants' motion for stay 41 are denied as moot. Signed on 9/24/2012 by Judge Owen M. Panner. (dkj)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER: Denying Motion for Reconsideration 13 ; Denying Motion for Summary Judgment 16 . Ordered & Signed on 6/22/11 by Judge Owen M. Panner. (kf)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER: Complaint 2 dismissed w/ leave to amend within 30 days; failure to file amended complaint, using the court's filing form, will result in the dismissal of this case. Denying w/o prejudice Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 4 . Clerk of Court directed to send plaintiff civil rights complaint form. Ordered & Signed on 3/30/11 by Judge Owen M. Panner. (kf)
|
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 Oregon 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.
