WILLIAMS v. JIM
Plaintiff: DAVE WILLIAMS
Defendant: DR. BYUNGHAK JIM
Case Number: 2:2015cv00855
Filed: July 1, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office: Pittsburgh Office
County: Greene
Presiding Judge: Cynthia Reed Eddy
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
March 22, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 85 ORDER indicating that that Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment 51 is denied and Defendant's motion for summary judgment 59 is granted; that the Report and Recommendation 80 of Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy is hereby adopted as the opinion of the district court. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 3/22/17. (jg)
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: WILLIAMS v. JIM
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: DAVE WILLIAMS
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: DR. BYUNGHAK JIM
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?