ROMERO v. FOLINO et al
Plaintiff:
RICHARD ROMERO, JR.
Defendant:
NEDRA GREGO, BYUNGHAK JIN, JOHN/JANE DOE, LOUIS FOLINO and JOHN MCANANY
Case Number:
2:2013cv00691
Filed:
May 17, 2013
Court:
Pennsylvania Western District Court
Office:
Pittsburgh Office
County:
Greene
Presiding Judge:
Lisa Pupo Lenihan
Nature of Suit:
Prisoner Civil Rights (Prison Condition)
Cause of Action:
42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By:
Plaintiff
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Date Filed | # | Document Text |
|---|---|---|
| April 16, 2014 | 126 |
ORDER OF COURT DENYING 120 Defendants' Joint Motion to Supplement Exhibit List. See Order for further details. Mailed to Pro Se Plaintiff this same day. Signed by Judge Arthur J. Schwab on 04/16/2014. (lcb)
|
| February 25, 2014 | 45 |
ORDER OF COURT ADOPTING 39 Report and Recommendations; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' 11 27 Motions to Dismiss. Plaintiff's claims against Defendant John/Jane Doe are DISMISSED; Plaintiff's equal protection cla im is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. This case shall proceed to jury trial on April 22, 2014, on Plaintiff's claim for deliberate indifference against Defendants Folino, Dr. Jin, Greco, McAnany. A separate Case Management Order shall be entered. Signed by Judge Arthur J. Schwab on 2/25/2014. (lcb)
|
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 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.
