HINTON v. TENNIS et al
COREY HINTON |
FRANKLIN J. TENNIS, EVANS GARY, JR., RICHARD BENNETT, JOEL S. DIXON, R. REED, ( ) HAMILTON, MARIROSA LAMAS, M.A. SMITH, TIMOTHY I. MARK, CRAIG HARPSTER, S. SIMCOX and D. KUHN |
2:2008cv00295 |
January 17, 2008 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
Philadelphia Office |
Centre |
LAWRENCE F. STENGEL |
Prison Condition |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 34 ORDER THAT THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR ALL PURPOSES.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LAWRENCE F. STENGEL ON 10/27/10. 10/28/10 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED AND FAXED. (COPY TO PRO SE)(lvj, ) |
Filing 19 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFTS' MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. FURTHER ORDERED THAT DEFT SIMCOX IS DISMISSED AS A DEFT IN THIS ACTION; DEFTS GARY AND BENNETT ARE DISMISSED AS DEFTS IN THIS ACTION BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF PROPER SERVICE; THE PLFF SHALL FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT CONSISTENT WITH THIS MEMORANDUM WITHIN THIRTY DAYS O THE DATE OF THIS ORDER; ALSO WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER DEFT HAMILTON SHALL FILE A REASON TO SHOW CAUSE WHY DEFAULT JUDGMENT SHOULD NOT BE ENTERED AGAINST HIM FOR FAILURE TO RESPOND TO THIS COMPLAINT.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LAWRENCE F. STENGEL ON 3/12/09. 3/16/09 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED AND FAXED.(lvj, ) |
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 Pennsylvania Eastern 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.