MURRAY v. ENNIS et al
| BRAY JIBAIL MURRAY |
| PAULA ENNIS, MICHAEL C. BARONE, EDWARD J. WOJCIK and JAMES A. REED |
| 1:2008cv00264 |
| September 22, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Prisoner Civil Rights (Prison Condition) Office |
| Forest |
| Susan Paradise Baxter |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
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
164
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER that Plaintiffs Motion for New Trial: Altering or Amending the Judgment (ECF No. 145) and Amended Motion for New Trial (ECF No. 162) are DENIED. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 9/11/12. (nk)
|
|
Filing
98
MEMORANDUM JUDGMENT ORDER: AND NOW, to wit, this 21st Day of June, 2011; IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 66 shall be, and hereby is, GRANTED IN PART to the extent it relates to Plaintiff's claim that Defenda nt Woodard retaliated against him for utilizing the inmate grievance process by allegedly rejecting and returning-to-sender certain non-legal correspondence without first providing Plaintiff notice and an opportunity to protest. As to this particula r claim, JUDGMENT shall be, and hereby is, GRANTED in favor of Defendant Woodard and against Plaintiff. In all other respects, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 66 shall be, and hereby is, DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff&# 039;s Motion for Summary Judgment 70 shall be, and hereby is, DENIED, inasmuch as the Court perceives genuine issues of material fact on this record with respect to each of the points raised in Plaintiffs motion. The Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Baxter on June 3, 2011 94 is adopted as the opinion of this Court to the extent set forth herein. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 06/21/2011. (kas)
|
|
Filing
93
MEMORANDUM ORDER: AND NOW, this 19th Day of April, 2011; IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 88 be, and hereby is, DENIED. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on February 7, 2011 91 , is adopted as the opinion of this Court. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 04/19/2011. (kas)
|
|
Filing
65
MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 60 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; adopting oral Report and Recommendations entered on the record on 7/23/2010. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 08/16/2010. (kas)
|
|
Filing
59
AMENDED MEMORANDUM JUDGMENT ORDER: AND NOW, to wit, this 8th day of July, 2010, IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint 31 be, and hereby is, GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: 1. Defendants Hays, Morley, and Marzulla are hereby DISMISSED from this case, due to Plaintiff's lack of intent to include them as Defendants; 2. Defendants Marks, Varner, Sharon M. Dombrowski, Toski, Grunland, and Overmyer are hereby DISMISSED from this case, due to their lack of personal involvement in any of the challenged actions; 3. As to the remaining Defendants, the motion to dismiss 31 is GRANTED with respect to: (a) Plaintiff's First Amendment claim against Defendants Gill and Nicholson premis ed on his alleged denial of access to the courts; (b) Plaintiff's equal protection claim regarding his placement in administrative custody; (c) Plaintiff's equal protection claim against Defendant Woodard premised on the rejection of his no n-legal correspondence; and (d) Plaintiff's equal protection claim against Defendants Gill, Nicholson, Ireland, and Banta premised on the alleged denial of access to the law library. Inasmuch as the Magistrate Judge converted said motion to a R ule 56 motion for summary judgment, JUDGMENT is hereby entered in favor of the relevant Defendants and against Plaintiff Bray Jibril Murray with respect to the foregoing claims. 4. As to the remaining Defendants, the motion to dismiss 31 is DENIED with respect to: (a) Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Ennis, Wojcik, Reed, Bill C. Dombrowski, Bensel, Nevling, Repko, Barone, and Ford relative to his placement in administrative custody; (b) Plaintiff's Fi rst Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Woodard relative to the rejection of Plaintiff's non-legal correspondence; (c) Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Gill, Nicholson, Ireland, and Banta relative t o Plaintiff's alleged denial of access to the law library; and (d) Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Ireland, Gill and Banta relative to the alleged false misconduct issued by Defendant Ireland. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter dated November 30, 2009 38 is adopted, in part, as the opinion of this Court to the extent set forth herein. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 07/08/2010. (kas)
|
|
Filing
45
MEMORANDUM JUDGMENT ORDER: AND NOW, to wit, this 5th day of February, 2010, IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint 31 be, and hereby is, GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: 1. Defendants Hays, Mor ley, and Marzulla are hereby DISMISSED from this case, due to Plaintiff's lack of intent to include them as Defendants; 2. Defendants Marks, Varner, Barone, Sharon M. Dombrowski, Toski, Grunland, and Overmyer are hereby DISMISSED from this case, due to their lack of personal involvement in any of the challenged actions; 3. As to the remaining Defendants, the motion to dismiss 31 is GRANTED with respect to: (a) Plaintiff's First Amendment claim against Defendants Gill and Nicholson pr emised on his alleged denial of access to the courts; (b) Plaintiff's equal protection claim regarding his placement in administrative custody; (c) Plaintiff's equal protection claim against Defendant Woodard premised on the rejection of hi s non-legal correspondence; and (d) Plaintiff's equal protection claim against Defendants Gill, Nicholson, Ireland, and Banta premised on the alleged denial of access to the law library. Inasmuch as the Magistrate Judge converted said motion to a Rule 56 motion for summary judgment, JUDGMENT is hereby entered in favor of the relevant Defendants and against Plaintiff Bray Jibril Murray with respect to the foregoing claims. 4. As to the remaining Defendants, the motion to dismiss 31 is DE NIED with respect to: (a) Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Ennis, Wojcik, Reed, Bill C. Dombrowski, Bensel, Nevling, Repko, and Ford relative to his placement in administrative custody;(b) Plaintiff's First A mendment retaliation claim against Defendant Woodard relative to the rejection of Plaintiff's non-legal correspondence; (c) Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Gill, Nicholson, Ireland, and Banta relative to Pla intiff's alleged denial of access to the law library; and (d) Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Ireland, Gill and Banta relative to the alleged false misconduct issued by Defendant Ireland. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter dated November 30, 2009 38 is adopted, in part, as the opinion of this Court to the extent set forth herein. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 02/05/2010. (kas)
|
|
Filing
38
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that 31 MOTION to Dismiss re 27 Amended Complaint MOTION to Dismiss re 27 Amended Complaint MOTION to Dismiss re 27 Amended Complaint filed by DORINA YARNER, NICHOLSON, KURT L. GRANLUND, BILL C. DOMBROWS KI, SHARON M. DOMBROWSKI, W. GILL, FORD, D.A. WOODARD, M.C. REPKO, BEN MARZULLA, TIMOTHY I. MARKS, EDWARD J. WOJCIK, LAURA BANTA, BENSEL, M.L. NEVLING, MORLEY, PAUL A. ENNIS, IRELAND, M.D. OVERMYER, PAULA TOSKI, MICHAEL C. BARONE, JAMES A. REED, CINDY HAYS be granted in part and denied in part. Objections to R&R due by 12/17/2009. Signed by Judge Susan Paradise Baxter on 11/30/2009. (fcf)
|
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 Western 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.
