HANKINS v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
| ROBERT HANKINS |
| COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, JEFFREY BEARD, CINDY G. WATSON, MARGARET M. GORDON, JOHN S. SHAFFER, E.P. BUSH, NELSON ZULLINGER, JOSEPH D., E.M. WEAVER, TIMOTHY J. MARK, L.S. KERNS-BARR, Z. MOSLAK, KERRI CROSS, JOHN ANDRADE, YATES, KRISTEN P. REISINGER, RAYMOND SOBINA, MICHAEL BARONE, L.H. HEASTER, KEVIN DITTMAN, EDWARD HEBERLING, DONALD SKUNDA, CAROL KENNEDY, KURT GRANDLUND, JOLENE B., PAMELA SUTTON, JOHN AMES, MCKNIGHT, WHITEHEAD, S.S. BEST, JOAN DELIE, GLORIA POINDEXTER, RHONDA SHERBINE, GARY BROWNFIELD, GEORGE BARKER, ED DENKER, MARK MATTHEWS, MIKE ZAVADA, CHAPMAN, WARDEN MEDLOCK, B. CROFTCHECK, TIMMIE BURNSWORTH, JAMEE WALIGURA, JOHN DOE, THOMAS W. SHAFFER, JEFFREY W. WHITEKO, MICHAEL J. GAROFALO, MICHELLE KELLEY, EUGENE GRIMM, DEB WOODARD, MILLER, S. SATTERLEE, HUAPT, YOUNKIN, GREGORY PACKING, INC. and P. MCKISSOCK |
| 1:2009cv00182 |
| July 20, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Erie Office |
| Erie |
| Sean J. McLaughlin |
| Susan Paradise Baxter |
| None |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
185
MEMORANDUM JUDGMENT ORDER: AND NOW, this 22nd Day of December, 2011, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The motion for summary judgment 139 filed by Defendant Burnsworth shall be, and hereby is, GRANTED. Accordingly, JUDGMENT shall be, and hereby is, entere d in favor of Defendant Timmie Burnsworth and against Plaintiff Robert Hankins as to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim premised upon her alleged deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. 2. The motion for summary judgment 142 fil ed by the Commonwealth Defendants shall be, and hereby is, DENIED insofar as it relates to Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant McKnight. As to all other remaining claims against the Commonwealth Defendants, said moti on shall be GRANTED and JUDGMENT shall be, and hereby is, entered in favor of the Commonwealth Defendants and against Plaintiff Robert Hankins. 3. The motion for summary judgment 144 filed by the Fayette County Defendants shall be, and hereby is, DENIED insofar as it is based on Plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies. In addition, said motion is DENIED insofar as it relates to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendants Barker and Brownfiel d premised upon their use of a stun belt. As to all other remaining claims against the Fayette County Defendants, said motion shall be GRANTED and JUDGMENT shall be, and hereby is, entered in favor of the Fayette County Defendants and against Plaintiff Robert Hankins. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on November 30, 2011 182 , is adopted as the opinion of this Court to the extent set forth herein. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 12/22/2011. (kas)
|
|
Filing
138
MEMORANDUM ORDER: AND NOW, this 20th Day of June, 2011; IT IS ORDERED that Defendants Mayor James E. Sileo, Judge Steven P. Leskinen, and Edward Fike be, and hereby are, DISMISSED from this case due to Plaintiff's failure to prosecute. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on May 31, 2011 135 , is adopted as the opinion of this Court. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 06/20/2011. (kas)
|
|
Filing
119
MEMORANDUM ORDER: AND NOW, to wit, this 7th day of September, 2010, based upon the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. The Commonwealth Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment [77 ] be, and hereby is, GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as follows: a. The motion is DENIED with regard to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Kennedy, Sobina, Watson, Beard, and Woodard arising from the alleged stoppage of Pl aintiffs medically prescribed/ recommended toothpaste; b. The motion is DENIED with regard to Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment due process claim challenging the manner in which Plaintiff's disciplinary hearings were conducted insofar as tho se claims are directed against Defendants Joseph D., Weaver, Kerns-Barr, Mark, Moslak, Cross, Andrade, and McKissock; c. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's retaliation claim against Defendants Best and McKnight regarding their alle ged denial of toiletries to, and verbal harassment of, Plaintiff; d. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Zullinger, Gordon, Heberling, Sobina, Heaster, J. Shaffer, Dittman, Skunda, Kennedy, Reisinger, and Beard for alleged deliberate indifference to his health and safety relative to the food that was served at SCI-Forest; and e. The motion is GRANTED in all other respects.2. The Fayette County Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 79 be, and hereby is, GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as follows: a. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's First Amendment free exercise of religion claim against Defendants Chapman, Medlock, Croftcheck, and Waligura; b. The motion is D ENIED with respect to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Brownfield, Barker, Dunkard, and Matthews for excessive force arising from their alleged activation of a "stun belt" on Plaintiff;c. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Chapman, Medlock, Croftcheck, and Waligura for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's health and safety arising from his alleged placement in a cell with an inmate "with mental health problems" who "had feces and urine throughout his assigned cell"; d. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against the Fayette County Jail Defendants arising from Plaintiff's al leged placement in a cell, on or about January 3, 2008, with "glass all over the bed frame, and exposed live electrical wires"; e. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Chapman, Crof tcheck, Medlock, and Waligura relative to the conditions in the Fayette County Jail's Special Housing Unit ("SHU"); and f. The motion is GRANTED in all other respects.3. Defendant Burnsworth's Motion to Dismiss 84 be, and hereby is, GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: a. The motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Burnsworth for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs following an incident on Februar y 6, 2008 in which he was allegedly "electrified" by use of a stun belt; and b. The motion is GRANTED in all other respects.4. The Motion to Dismiss filed on behalf of Defendants Poindexter and Sherbine 100 be, and hereby is, GRANTED, and those Defendants are dismissed from this case; and5. Defendant Gregory Packaging's Motion to Dismiss 103 be, and hereby is, GRANTED and that Defendant is dismissed from this case. By virtue of the foregoing, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the fo llowing Defendants be terminated from this case, either because there are no longer any claims pending against them or because they are not identified anywhere in the body of the Amended Complaint: the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, E.P. Bush, Yates, Michael Barone, Kurt Grandlund, Jolene B., Pamela Sutton, John Ames, Whitehead, Joan Delie, Gloria Poindexter, Rhonda Sherbine, Mike Zavada (incorrectly identified by Plaintiff as "Lt. Salvoda"), Thomas W. Shaffer, Esq., Jeffrey W. Whiteko, Esq., Michael J. Garofalo, Esq., Michelle Kelley, Esq., Eugene Grimm, Esq., Miller, S. Satterlee, Huapt, Lt. Younkin, Gregory and Packing, Inc. and Tom Corbett. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendant's Motion 117 to Amend/ Correct Complain t is DENIED relative to the claims being dismissed herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED with respect to Defendants Sileo, Leskinen and Fike that the Plaintiff shall have an additional sixty (60) days in which to make service of process and that the Magistr ate Judge shall enter an order directing the Marshal to make service upon the foregoing Defendants. The report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter dated July 29, 2010 115 is adopted as the opinion of this Court to the extent set forth herein. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 09/07/2010. (kas)
|
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.
