Thompson v. Prison Health Care et al
||Daniel L. Thompson
||Prison Health Care, Vermont Department of Corrections, Chittenden County Correctional Facility and Andrew Pallito
||September 28, 2012
||Vermont District Court
||John M. Conroy
||J. Garvan Murtha
|Nature of Suit:
||Prisoner: Civil Rights
|Cause of Action:
||42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|May 29, 2013
ORDER ADOPTING 39 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ; Defendants Andrew Pallito, Greg Hale and Shana's 29 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. The Vermont Attorney General's Office is ORDERED to release forthwith to Plaintiff all reports regarding h is medical treatment, and to assist him in ascertaining the identities of all individuals involved in his medical treatment. If the information is provided to Plaintiff, he may file a Second Amended Complaint naming those individuals he intends to sue no later than 30 days following receipt of the identifying information. Plaintiff's 30 Motion for Admission of Undisputed Facts from Party Opponents is DENIED. All motions filed prior to the Amended Complaint 13 , 14 , 15 , 19 , 21 , 24 are DENIED as moot. Plaintiff's 38 Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED without prejudice, and his 38 Motion for Default Judgment is DENIED. It is further certified that any appeal taken in forma pauperis from this Order would not be taken in good faith because such an appeal would be frivolous. Signed by District Judge J. Garvan Murtha on 5/29/225. (wjf)
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 Vermont District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.