Hancock v. Rickard et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|September 19, 2018
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Having reviewed the 51 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn, the court hereby DENIES petitioner's 5 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. This matter shall remain referred to Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn for further proceedings. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 9/19/2018. (cc: plaintiff, pro se, counsel of record and any unrepresented party) (arb)
|April 19, 2018
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: In order to enable the court to evaluate Hancock's entitlement to injunctive relief, the court believes a response by defendants (who have access to plaintiff's medical records) is necessary. Once defendants ha ve filed a written response addressing the allegations listed above, the court will determine whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary. For this reason, plaintiff's objections are SUSTAINED insofar as the court will further evaluate his alleg ations regarding inadequate medical care. His objections are OVERRULED in all other respects. The court RECOMMITS this matter to Magistrate Judge Abhoulhosn to further evaluate Hancock's entitlement to injunctive relief with respect to the denial of Metamucil. Terminated: 12 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 4/19/2018. (cc: plaintiff, pro se, counsel of record and Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn) (arb)
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 West Virginia Southern 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.
Why Is My Information Online?