Harper v. Blagg et al
| Cedeal Harper |
| Michael Blagg, Margaret Clifford, James McCloud, Jason Collions, Paul Perry, David Ballard and Jim Rubenstein |
| 2:2013cv19796 |
| August 6, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia |
| Charleston Office |
| Fayette |
| Thomas E. Johnston |
| Dwane L. Tinsley |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Defendant |
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
99
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER sustaining in part and overruling in part Plaintiff's 98 OBJECTIONS to 97 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge as more fully set forth herein; adopting the 97 Proposed Findings and Recomme ndations by Magistrate Judge to the extent it is consistent with this Memorandum Opinion and Order; granting in part and denying in part Defendants' 94 MOTION for Summary Judgment as more fully set forth herein; dismissing Defendants Clifford and McCloud as there are no remaining claims against these defendants; directing that Plaintiff retain counsel, if he should so choose, within 30 days of the date of this Memorandum Opinion and Order. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 10/28/2015. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (tmh)
|
|
Filing
86
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 75 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION; denying Plaintiff's 42 PROPOSED ORDER to Show Cause, re: Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order, 48 SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION for Preliminary In junction and/or Restraining Order, and 66 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and/or Restraining Order; pursuant to the Court's 3/18/2014 Order, this case remains referred to Magistrate Judge Tinsley for further proceedings. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 7/29/2014. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (tmh)
|
|
Filing
73
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION ORDER Adopting 26 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge; denying plaintiff's 20 & 21 Motions for Default Judgment by the Court pursuant to Rule 55(b)(2), FRCivP; Pursuant to the Courts 3/18/2014, Order, this case remains referred to Magistrate Judge Tinsley for further proceedings Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 5/15/2014. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (tmr)
|
|
Filing
57
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AND CERTIFICATION THAT APPEAL IS NOT TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH re: 50 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal to 4CCA; the Court has denied Plaintiff leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, and as directed and set forth more fully herein; certifying that because plaintiff's notice of appeal is procedurally barred, it necessarily fails to present a nonfrivolous question for review and, thus, is not taken in good faith; defendant is advised that he may file a mo tion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in accordance with Rule 24(a)(5) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 4/4/2014. (cc: Clerk, United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; plaintiff; attys; any unrepresented party) (taq)
|
|
Filing
47
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting Defendant's 17 MOTION to Dismiss; dismissing without prejudice Defendants David Ballard, Jason Collins, Paul Parry, and Jim Rubenstein from this action; directing that this matter be referred to Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for the continuation of the proceedings concerning the remaining Defendants in this case. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 3/18/2014. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (tmh)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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.
