Cox v. Whorton et al

Filing 36

JUDGMENT - Ds' 11 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as to :1. All claims against Ds Miller, McDaniel, MacArthur, Whorton, DAmico, Endel, and Tripp, including those in Counts V, VII, and VIII; 2. All claims brought against all remaining Ds in their official capacities for money damages;3. Count V - all claims against all Ds. These claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata; and4. Count VIII - P's 8th Amendment claims against D Lemich with regard to the November 2, 2005 alle ged denial of medical care. P failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Ds' 11 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as to : 1. Counts 1 and II; 2. Count VII - P's claims against D Bishop; and 3. Count VIII - P's 1st & 8th Amendment claims against D Lemich with regard to the July 26, 2006 alleged retaliatory denial of medical care. Signed by Lance S. Wilson on 10/30/2009. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case

r

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
***** STEVE MICHAEL COX, Plaintiff, V. CASE NUMBER: 3:08-CV-00110-RCJ-VPC GLEN WHORTON, et al., Defendants. Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict. Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered. X Decision by Court. This action came to be considered before the Court. The issues have been considered and a decision has been rendered. DISTRICT OF NEVADA

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (#11) is GRANTED as to : 1. All claims against defendants Miller, McDaniel, MacArthur, Whorton, D'Amico, Endel, and Tripp, including those in Counts V, VII, and VIII; 2. All claims brought against all remaining defendants in their official capacities for money damages; 3. Count V - all claims against all defendants. These claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata; and, 4. Count VIII - Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against defendant Lemich with regard to the November 2, 2005 alleged denial of medical care. Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (#11) is DENIED as to: 1. Counts 1 and II; 2. Count VII - Plaintiff's claims against defendant Bishop; and 3. Count VIII Plaintiff's First and Eighth Amendment claims against defendant Lemich with regard to the July 26, 2006 alleged retaliatory denial of medical care. October 30, 2009 LANCE S. WILSON Clerk

/s/ D. R. Morgan Deputy Clerk