Brooks v. United States of America
Plaintiff: Kenneth Brooks
Defendant: United States of America
Case Number: 1:2010cv00150
Filed: June 4, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee
Office: Chattanooga Office
County: Hamilton
Presiding Judge: Curtis L Collier
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury- Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1402
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 2, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 39 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Judgment shall be entered in favor of defendant. Signed by Magistrate Judge William B Carter on 9/2/2011. (BJL)
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 Tennessee Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Brooks v. United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kenneth Brooks
Represented By: Marvin B Berke
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: United States of America
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?