Day v. White County, Tennessee, 2:16-cv-00002. (2017)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20171212d75
Visitors: 8
Filed: Dec. 11, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 11, 2017
Summary: ORDER WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR. , Chief District Judge . For the reasons in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, Quality Correctional Health Care's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 20) is GRANTED, White County and Thomas' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 31) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and Day's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 37) is DENIED. Day's excessive force claim against Thomas will proceed to trial. All remaining claims are DISMISSED WITH P
Summary: ORDER WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR. , Chief District Judge . For the reasons in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, Quality Correctional Health Care's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 20) is GRANTED, White County and Thomas' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 31) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and Day's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 37) is DENIED. Day's excessive force claim against Thomas will proceed to trial. All remaining claims are DISMISSED WITH PR..
More
ORDER
WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR., Chief District Judge.
For the reasons in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, Quality Correctional Health Care's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 20) is GRANTED, White County and Thomas' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 31) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and Day's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 37) is DENIED. Day's excessive force claim against Thomas will proceed to trial. All remaining claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and White County and Quality Correction Health Care are TERMINATED from this action. This case will proceed to trial on January 23, 2018, and all deadlines in the Court's May 2, 2017 Order (Doc. No. 26) remain in effect.
In order to facilitate the possibility of settlement and to obtain admissions of fact or stipulations regarding the authenticity and admissibility of documents, this case is RETURNED to the Magistrate Judge to conduct a Final Case Management Conference in accordance with Local Rule 16.01(d)(6).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
