Ewbank v. Emerick et al
| R. Drake Ewbank |
| Vanessa Becker, Jeff Emerick, Robert Lee, Pamela Martin, Oregon Department of Human Services, Oregon Health Authority, Lynn Saxton, Darcy Strahan, The Oregon Addictions and Mental Health Division, The Oregon Health Authority Health Services, The State of Oregon and Richard Wilcox |
| 6:2017cv00187 |
| February 2, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Eugene (6) Office |
| Jolie A. Russo |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12111 Americans With Disabilities Act |
| 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
215
Opinion and Order signed on 10/24/2023 by Magistrate Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai: Plaintiff's objections to the Order (ECF No. 196 ) and supplemental objections (ECF No. 197 ) are DENIED. Plaintiff's motion to set aside the Court's Opinion and Order of August 29, 2023 (ECF No. 199 ) is DENIED. Plaintiff's motion to strike misfiled response documents (ECF No. 198 ) is DENIED as moot. (jk)
|
|
Filing
194
OPINION AND ORDER signed on 8/29/2023 by Magistrate Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai: Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 198 ) is GRANTED and the Opinion and Order (ECF No. 187 ) is amended as follows: Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 153 ) is GRANTED. This action is dismissed. (jk)
|
|
Filing
187
Opinion and Order signed on 8/11/2023 by Magistrate Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai: Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 153 ) is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 175 ) is DENIED. Plaintiff&# 039;s motion objecting "to the failure of the Court['s] pro bono program" (ECF No. 167 ) is DENIED. Plaintiff's motion to stay the case pending Plaintiff's retention of counsel (ECF No. 179 ) is DENIED as moot. With the exception of his retaliation claim under the ADA, Plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice. (jk)
|
|
Filing
84
ORDER: Adopting Judge Russo's Findings and Recommendation 78 in full. Plaintiff's Supplemental Motion to Amend 75 us denied. Plaintiff's Motion for leave to file a fifth amended complaint is denied as moot. Signed on 10/15/2018 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (cp)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER: Magistrate Judge Russos Findings and Recommendation 64 is adopted in full. Defendants Motion to Dismiss 62 is granted. Plaintiffs claims under Or. Rev. Stat. § 430.073, those related to travel reimbursement, and all claims und er Title II of the ADA against named defendants in their individual capacities are dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff is granted one final opportunity to file a concise complaint in compliance with the local rules and the federal rules of civil proc edure. Plaintiff is granted 14 days to file a motion for leave to file an amended complaint complying with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Plaintiff may not file additional or supplemental briefings, or amended complaints, beyond those authorized by the federal or local rules absent prior approval from this Court. Signed on 5/25/2018 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (Copy mailed to plaintiff) (cp)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER: Magistrate Judge Russos Findings and Recommendation 54 is adopted in full. Defendants Motion to Dismiss 44 is granted. Plaintiffs Request for Sanctions 46 is denied. Plaintiff is granted 14 days to file a motion for leave to file an amended complaint. Signed on 1/30/2018 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (cp)
|
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.
