Way v. Johnson

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Way v. Johnson. Read the opinion of the Court — 893 F. Supp. 2d 15
District Court, District of Columbia·Decided September 26, 2012·No. Civil Action No. 2011-1182·Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JOHN L. WAY, SR., ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Case No. 11-1182 (RJL) v. ) ) ISAAC JOHNSON, et al, ) ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER tt- For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion entered this 2-' day of

September 20 12, it is hereby

ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Appointment of Counsel Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. 3006A [Dkt. # 13] is DENIED; it is further

ORDERED that Defendants Warden Simon T. Wainwright and Warden Isaac

Johnson's Motion for Additional Time to File a Response to the Complaint [Dkt. # 16]

and Defendant's Motion for an Extension of Time to File a Response to Plaintiffs

Complaint [Dkt. #28] are GRANTED nunc pro tunc; it is further

ORDERED that Warden Simon T ..Wainwright's Motion to Dismiss or in the

Alternative for Summary Judgment [Dkt. # 19] is GRANTED; it is further

ORDERED that Defendant Isaac Johnson's Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. #21] or, in

the Alternative, for Summary Judgment [Dkt. #22] is GRANTED; it is further ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. #29] is GRANTED; and it

is further

ORDERED that plaintiffs complaint is DISMISSED as to all defendants.

This is a final appealable Order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a).

SO ORDERED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Way v. Johnson, (D.D.C. 2012).

Way v. Johnson (Way v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.