Harvey v. Large et al
Filing
112
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 89 Motion for Summary Judgment ;denying 96 Motion to Compel; the Clerk is DIRECTED to set this matter for a trial in the Big Stone Gap division (Opinion and Order mailed to Pro Se Party);. Signed by Senior Judge Norman K. Moon on 3/16/2018. (tvt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
TERRENCE A. HARVEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
T. LARGE, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 7:15CV00401
By: Norman Moon
United States District Judge
ORDER
In accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this day, it is hereby ORDERED
as follows:
1) Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 89 ) is DENIED in part as to
Harvey’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claim, Fourteenth Amendment due process
claim, and state law tort claims.
2) Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 89 ) is GRANTED in part as
to Harvey’s Eighth Amendment living conditions claim, and any claim against
defendants in their official capacity for monetary damages.
3) Harvey’s motion to compel discovery (Docket No. 96) is DENIED as Defendants
have produced all of their available video footage, and any factual issue related to the
motion to compel is addressed by the court’s denial of summary judgment as to Harvey’s
Eighth Amendment excessive force claim, Fourteenth Amendment due process claim,
and state law tort claims.
4) The Clerk is DIRECTED to set this matter for trial in the Big Stone Gap division.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to send a certified copy of this Order and the
accompanying Memorandum Opinion to all counsel of record and the pro se Plaintiff.
16th
ENTER this ____ day of March, 2018.
2
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.
Why Is My Information Online?