Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

16-209 - GILMORE v. DECKER et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
16-209 - GILMORE v. DECKER et al
April 18, 2017
PDF | More
Entry Discussing Motion for Summary Judgment - Plaintiff Amar Gilmore, who at all times relevant to this action was a federal inmate incarcerated at the Federal Correction Institution in Terre Haute, Indiana, brought this action pro se against the United States of America, David Decker, Genevieve Daughtery, and Sarah Walters. Mr. Gilmore asserts a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act against the United States and Eighth Amendment claims against David Decker, Genevieve Daughtery, and Sarah Walters (the "Individual Defendants") based on his alleged receipt of deficient medical treatment while under their care. The Individual Defendants move for summary judgment on the ground that the plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before bringing this suit. For the reasons explained in this Entry, the Individual Defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied. Filing No. 23. The Individual Defendants have through April 28, 2017, in which to respond to the Court's proposal. Alternatively, they may withdraw their affirmative defense by this date. (See Entry.) Copy to plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 4/18/2017. (RSF)
May 18, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY Discussing Rule 56(f) Notice Regarding Exhaustion - This matter will be set for a Pavey hearing by separate entry. A pre-Pavey conference will also be set and conducted by the Magistrate Judge. The Court will attempt to recruit volunteer counsel to assist Mr. Gilmore with the hearing. If Mr. Gilmore objects to representation by voluntary counsel, he has through May 30, 2017, to notify the Court (See Entry). Copy sent to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 5/18/2017.(DW)
December 20, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY Rejecting Exhaustion Defense Following Pavey Hearing - The exhaustion defense is therefore rejected. A scheduling order setting forth how Mr. Gilmore's claims against the United States and Individual Defendants shall proceed will issue by separate entry. The Court previously denied Mr. Gilmore's motion for counsel without prejudice and stated that he could renew his motion once the issue of exhaustion was resolved. He may therefore renew his motion for counsel at this time. The clerk is directed to send Mr. Gilmore a copy of the form motion for assistance recruiting counsel along with his copy of this Entry (SEE ENTRY). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 12/20/2017. Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. (Attachments: # (1) form motion for assistance recruiting counsel) (DW)