Ladd v. Thibault et al
| Eugene F. Ladd |
| Deborah Thibault, Paul Heath, Richard Plank, Jay Simons, Susan Blair, Greg Hale, Kristin Prior, Jacqueline Kotkin, Raymond Flum, Dominic Damato and Michael O'Malley |
| 1:2008cv00255 |
| December 12, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Vermont |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Jerome J. Niedermeier |
| J. Garvan Murtha |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
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
44
ORDER AFFIRMING, APPROVING and ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for Magistrate Judge's 40 Report and Recommendation re: dfts' 28 Motion to Dismiss and pltf's 27 Motion for Summary Judgment. Dfts' 28 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Pltf's 27 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. This case is hereby DISMISSED. Court DENIES petitioner a certificate of appealability because petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. Any appeal taken in forma pauperis from this Order would not be taken in good faith because such and appeal would be frivolous. Signed by Judge J. Garvan Murtha on 10/6/2009. (kak)
|
|
Filing
40
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - recommending that defendants' 28 MOTION to Dismiss be granted, and that Ladd's 27 MOTION for Summary Judgment be denied. Objections to R&R due by 9/21/2009. Signed by Judge John M. Conroy on 9/3/09. (hbc)
|
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 Vermont 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.
