Winston v. Rendell et al
| Michael Winston |
| Edward Rendell, Tom Corbett, Frank E Pawlowski and Michael P. Daley |
| 1:2010cv00867 |
| April 23, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Harrisburg Office |
| Adams |
| Christopher C. Conner |
| Assault, Libel, and Slander |
| 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
19
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT of the magistrate judge 12 & directing Clerk of Court to CLOSE case. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 11/16/10. (ki)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER re: report & recommendation of magistrate judge 7 - It is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Report & recommendation of magistrate judge 7 is ADOPTED in part & REJECTED in part as follows - a. ADOPTED insofar as it recs that complaint 1 be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted & b. REJECTED insofar as it recs that Winston be denied opp to amend complaint.; 2. Winston may file by 7/20/10 an amended complaint that alleges that each of the above-named deft was per sonally involved in civil rts violations for which he seeks relief - failure to comply w/ this Para shall result in complaint 1 being dismissed w/ prejudice.; 3. Case REMANDED to magistrate judge for further proceedings. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 06/29/10. (ki)
|
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 Middle 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.
