Mills v. C.C.A. et al
| David Mills |
| C.C.A., T.D.O.C., Cherry Lindamood, Leigh Kilzer, Gayle Ray, Reuban Hodge, William Boyd, Rhonald Ulmer, f/n/u Strickland, f/n/u McKintosh, Stephanie Pool, Theresa Cogswell, f/n/u Hendrix, Chris Clark, Ben Killingsworth, f/n/u Bass, Blair Leibach, f/n/u Rilley and f/n/u Brantly |
| 1:2010cv00015 |
| March 9, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Columbia Office |
| Todd J. Campbell |
| Juliet E. Griffin |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
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
130
ORDER: The Clerk shall take the appropriate action pursuant to Rule 3(d) as if the plaintiff's January 28, 2011, letter had been styled as a Notice of Appeal. Unless otherwise directed by the Court, there will be no further proceedings before or matters addressed by the Magistrate Judge in this case. Any party desiring to appeal this Order may do so by filing a motion for review no later than fourteen (14) days from the date this Order is served upon the party. The motion for review must be accompanied by a brief or other pertinent documents to apprise the District Judge of the basis for appeal. See Rule 72.02(b) of the Local Rules of Court. So ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Juliet E. Griffin on 8/16/11. (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS)(xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail & 6CCA via email)(af)
|
|
Filing
127
ORDER: The Court has received an Order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in this action. Plaintiffs appeal was dismissed, and the case was returned to this Court to "review the letter from Mills filed on 1/28/2011, to determine whether it should be filed as a notice of appeal." Docket No. 126 . This case is referred to the Magistrate Judge to make this determination. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 8/4/11. (dt)
|
|
Filing
112
ORDER: The Court has reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's Objections, and the file and finds nothing to change its prior ruling. Even accepting the Plaintiff's allegations as true and construing the Complaint liberally in favor of the pro se Plaintiff, the Court finds that Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a constitutional violation against Defendants herein. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 1/5/11. (dt)
|
|
Filing
108
ORDER: The Report and Recommendation 105 is adopted and approved. The Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Hodge, Ray and Tennessee Department of Correction 46 is GRANTED, and all federal claims against these Defendants are DISMISSED. The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Lindamood, Pool, Cogswell, Killingsworth, Leibach, Kilzer, Boyd, Ulmer and Corrections Corporation of America 72 is GRANTED, and all federal claims against these Defendants are DISMISSED. All claims against Defendant Clark are DISMISSED pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) and for the same reasons as the claims against Defendant Corrections Corporation of America. Finally, Plaintiff's state law claims are DISMISSED without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U. S.C. § 1367 (c). This Order shall constitute the final judgment in this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Any other pending Motions are denied as moot, and the Clerk is directed to close the file. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 1/4/11. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
105
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Magistrate Judge Griffin Recommends that: 1) the motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Reuben Hodge, Gayle Ray, and the Tennessee Department of Correction 46 be GRANTED; 2) the motion for summary judgment filed by Defenda nts Cherry Lindamood, f/n/u Strickland, Stephanie Pool, Theresa Cogswell, f/n/u Hendrix, Ben Killingsworth, f/n/u Bass, Blair Leibach, f/n/u Brantly, Leigh Kilzer, William Boyd, Rhonald Ulmer, f/n/u Rilley, f/n/u McKintosh, and Corrections Corporatio n of America 72 be GRANTED; 3) the claims against Defendant Clark should be DISMISSED pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and for the same reasons as the claims against the other CCA Defendants should be dismissed; and 4) all claims in this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE except for the Plaintiff's state law claims for negligence which are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Juliet E. Griffin on 12/14/10. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
99
ORDER: The Report and Recommendations re 86 is adopted and approved. Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injuntion 65 is Denied. This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings in accordance with the Court's prior Order. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 10/27/10. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
88
ORDER The style of the order entered 10/8/2010 80 is AMENDED to: David Mills v. C.C.A., et al. In all other respects, the 10/8/2010, order 80 remains in full force and effect. Signed by Magistrate Judge Juliet E. Griffin on 10/12/10. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
86
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Magistrate Judge Griffins RECOMMENDS that the Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief 65 be Denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge Juliet E. Griffin on 10/8/10. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER: To the extent that the Plaintiff wishes to makes these documents a part of the record, the motion to add evidence 59 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel 58 is Denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge Juliet E. Griffin on 8/2/10. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
54
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of two letters from the Plaintiff, seeking information on the status of this case and a copy of the Local Rules of Court 42 and 50 . The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of the docket sheet and the Local Rules of thi s Court to the Plaintiff. On 6/1/2010, the Plaintiff filed a "Response in Opposition to the Defendant's Answer" 48 , in which he seeks dismissal of the answer filed by Defendants Bass, Boyd, Brantly, C.C.A., Cogswell, Hendrix, Killing sworth, Kilzer, Leibach, Lindamood, McKintosh, Pool, Rilley, Strickland, and Ulmer 39 . Such request is DENIED. On 6/1/2010, Defendants T.D.O.C., Ray, and Reuban have filed a motion to dismiss 46 . Plaintiff shall have until July 1, 2010, to file a response to the motion. Plaintiff is warned that his failure to file a response to the motion by 7/1/2010, could result in a recommendation that his claims against Defendants T.D.O.C., Ray, and Reuban be dismissed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Juliet E. Griffin on 6/8/10. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
|
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 Middle 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.
