Walton, David et al v. Perkins, Scott et al
| David Christopher Lee Walton |
| Scott Perkins, Stan Henderickson, Ryan Hallman and Patrica Fish |
| 3:2017cv00956 |
| December 27, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin |
| Madison Office |
| Dodge |
| Barbara B. Crabb |
| Stephen L. Crocker |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
76
JUDGMENT entered in favor of defendants dismissing this case. (jef),(ps)
|
|
Filing
68
ORDER denying as moot plaintiff David Lee Walton's 51 Motion to Compel. Defendants' motion to amend their responses to plaintiff's October 19, 2018 requests for admissions, dkt. #54, is GRANTED only with respect to their responses served on December 10, 2018. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 1/18/2019. (jef),(ps)
|
|
Filing
50
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 43 Motion to Compel. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 10/26/2018. (jef),(ps)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER denying 15 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 16 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 9/19/2018. (jef),(ps)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER on ifp request: Plaintiff David Christopher Lee Walton assessed an initial partial filing fee of $4.68 due 1/18/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter A. Oppeneer on 12/27/17. (nln),(ps)
|
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 Wisconsin Western 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.
