Roberts et al v. State of Tennessee et al
| Marshall H. Murdock and Charles H. Roberts |
| William Calhoun, Jane Doe, Melvin Tirey, John Doe, State of Tennessee, Derrick R. Schofield, Ruben Hodge, Brenda Jones and Henry Steward |
| 3:2011cv01127 |
| November 28, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Nashville Office |
| Davidson |
| John S. Bryant |
| Kevin H. Sharp |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Both |
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
225
ORDER: For the reasons stated above, the above-referenced motions 150 , 155 , 159 & 202 are DENIED as moot. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 3/18/14. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
223
ORDER: For the reasons stated above, the undersigned Magistrate Judge DENIES these three motions to add additional defendants (Docket Entry Nos. 135, 146 and 205). It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 3/17/14. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
210
ORDER: For the foregoing reasons Plaintiffs' motion to compel (Docket Entry No. 124) is DENIED. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 2/5/14. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
192
ORDER: This order supersedes that order entered February 25, 2013 183 , which has been vacated upon the Court's granting the plaintiffs' motion to reconsider. The Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") [1 68] in this case on February 6, 2013, concluding that the two subject motions to dismiss 85 and 89 should be granted and that the complaint should be dismissed. The R&R is therefore ADOPTED AND ACCEPTED IN PART. With the order granting the plaintiff's motion to reconsider and vacating the previously entered order of dismissal, the other motions that were pending as of February 25, 2013 (ECF Nos. 124, 128, 134, 135, 140, 144, 146, 150, 152, 154, 155, 159, and 160) are REINSTATED ON THE DOCKET and remain referred to the Magistrate Judge. It is so ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 4/30/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
183
ORDER: In deciding to accept the R & R, the Court has given full consideration to Plaintiffs' Response to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. 182 . Accordingly, the Court hereby rules as follows: (1) The Report and Recommenda tion 168 is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED and Plaintiffs' objections are hereby OVERRULED; (2) Defendants Calhoun, Hodge, Jones, Schofield, and Steward's Motion to Dismiss 85 is hereby GRANTED; (3) The Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of Defe ndant Melvin Tirey 89 is hereby GRANTED; (4) The remaining pending motions (DE Nos. 124 , 128 , 134 , 135 , 140 , 144 , 146 , 150 , 152 , 154 , 155 , 159 , and 160 ) are hereby DENIED as moot; and (5) This case is hereby DISMISSED WIT H PREJUDICE. The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment in a separate document in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 2/25/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
168
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: For the reasons stated above, the undersigned Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the two subject motions to dismiss (Docket Entry Nos. 85 and 89 ) be GRANTED and that the complaint be DISMISSED. If this report and recom mendation is accepted, the undersigned further RECOMMENDS that all pending motions be DENIED as MOOT. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 2/6/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
121
ORDER: Therefore, motions identified as Docket Entry Nos. 111 and 115 areDENIED without prejudice to their being refiled bearing the signatures of both plaintiff Roberts and plaintiff Murdock. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 8/6/12. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
110
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: For the above reasons, the Court ORDERS that the motions referenced above (Docket Entry Nos. 35, 70, 95, 96, 97, 100, 101, 104, 105, 106, 107 and 108) be STRICKEN as improperly filed, but without prejudice to plaintiffs rights to refile such motions provided they bear the signatures of both named plaintiffs. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 6/29/12. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER: Accordingly, Roberts' "Motion for a Writ of Error as to the Recently Received Order from Judge Kevin H. Sharp" 51 is hereby DENIED. Roberts's requests for other relief in that Motion are also hereby DENIED. It is so ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 3/22/12. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(tmw)
|
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.
