BRANDON v. BURKHART et al
Plaintiff: CURTIS BRANDON
Defendant: RAYMOND BURKHART and DANIEL PACK
Case Number: 1:2016cv00177
Filed: July 12, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office: Erie Office
County: Forest
Presiding Judge: Susan Paradise Baxter
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 26, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 211 MEMORANDUM ORDER; IT IS ORDERED this 26th day of September, 2022, that the Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, ECF No. 210 , shall be, and hereby is, DENIED. Signed by Judge Susan Paradise Baxter on 09/26/2022. (snc)
August 12, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 207 MEMORANDUM ORDER: AND NOW, this 12th day August, 2021; IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants' motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 137 , shall be and hereby is, GRANTED. Consistent with the foregoing, JUDGMENT shall be entered by separate order pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in favor of Defendants Siegel, Burkhart, Blake, Stoddard, Chiles, Schleicher, Price, and Beach and against Plaintiff Curtis Brandon, on all remaining claims. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that t he Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lanzillo, issued on November 16, 2020, ECF No. 181 is adopted as the opinion of the Court. As there are no remaining claims or other matters pending before the Court in this case, the Clerk is directed to mark the above-captioned civil action "CLOSED." Signed by Judge Susan Paradise Baxter on 8/12/2021. (esa)
January 7, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 119 ORDER re 114 Objections filed by CURTIS BRANDON: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's objections are OVERRULED and the Order 108 entered by Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lanzillo on November 20, 2019 is AFFIRMED. Signed by Judge Susan Paradise Baxter on 01/07/2020. (esa)
September 25, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 86 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 49 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying 77 Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint; adopting Report and Recommendation 79 . For the reasons set forth in the Repo rt and Recommendation, which is hereby adopted as the final opinion of the Court, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendants Wetzel, Overmyer, Blicha, Ennis, Crowther, Oberlander, Wallace-Ireland, Conrad, Dupont, Ellenberger, Reed, Varner, and Horton are dismissed from this action, with prejudice. Signed by Judge Susan Paradise Baxter on 9/25/18. (jdg)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: BRANDON v. BURKHART et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: CURTIS BRANDON
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: RAYMOND BURKHART
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: DANIEL PACK
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?