Stephens v. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
| Jon Stephens |
| U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs |
| 4:2018cv01878 |
| June 7, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Houston Office |
| Harris |
| Sim Lake |
| Personal Injury- Medical Malpractice |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1391 |
| None |
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
88
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS - the 86 Memorandum and Recommendations is ADOPTED by this Court and Deft's 80 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution is DENIED.(Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified.(sanderson, 4)
|
|
Filing
67
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 63 Memorandum and Recommendations is hereby ADOPTED re: 58 Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction is granted and Plaintiffs current claims are dismissed for lac k of subject matter jurisdiction. ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for leave to file the Proposed Second Amended Complaint attached to his 64 objections is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file a second amended complaint which is consistent with this Court's order dismissing all claims involving questions of law or fact related to a benefits decision such as the surgical procedures provided to Plaintiff. Plaintiff may file a second amended complaint ba sed only on his allegation that the process for obtaining his consent to the surgeries violated the standard of care. The second amended complaint shall not contain any allegation of negligence or seek to recover for the failure to provide a particul ar surgical procedure because all such claims involve questions of law or fact related to a benefit decision, are barred by the Veterans Judicial Review Act, and have been dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff shall file the second amended complaint on or before July 23, 2021. (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified.(sanderson, 4)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 56 Memorandum and Recommendations, denying 45 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Service of Process (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified. (aboyd, 4)
|
|
Filing
44
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 42 Memorandum and Recommendations, denying 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment, denying 39 MOTION to Exclude Plaintiff's Expert, and Supplement to Motion for Summary Judgment (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified. (aboyd, 4)
|
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 Texas Southern 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
| Search for this case: Stephens v. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Jon Stephens | |
| Represented By: | Joseph Kyle Jones |
| 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: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs | |
| Represented By: | Fred Turner Hinrichs |
| 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.
