No. 18-6613
Hector R. DeJesus v. Salvador A. Godinez, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: admissible-evidence civil-procedure declaration evidence judgment-as-matter-of-law material-fact material-facts motion perjury summary-judgment sworn-declaration
Key Terms:
Punishment
Punishment
Latest Conference:
2019-01-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the defendants show there were no material issues in dispute and that they were entitled to judgment as a matter of law?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Did the defendants shoed there were no material issue in dispute to any material fact and that they were entitled to the judgment as a matter of law? 2. Whether a sworn declaration under penalty of perjury is admissible evidence to oppose or support motion for summary judgment? i TABLE OF CONTENT Questions presented... cers cecsscel . Parties are cited in the top page of petition.
Docket Entries
2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-11-12
Waiver of right of respondents Dr. Kul Sood, Ruth Brown, Sarah Faetanini, Sharla Range, Lorna Stokes, Wexford Health Sources, In. to respond filed.
2018-11-09
Waiver of right of respondents Salvador A. Godinez, et al. to respond filed.
2018-06-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 7, 2018)
2018-04-05
Application (17A1070) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until June 28, 2018.
2018-03-22
Application (17A1070) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from April 30, 2018 to June 28, 2018, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Attorneys
Dr. Kul Sood, Ruth Brown, Sarah Faetanini, Sharla Range, Lorna Stokes, Wexford Health Sources, In.
Julie Ann Teuscher — Cassidy Schade, LLP, Respondent
Julie Ann Teuscher — Cassidy Schade, LLP, Respondent
Salvador A. Godinez, et al.
Frank Henry Bieszczat — Office of the Illinois Attorney General, Respondent
Frank Henry Bieszczat — Office of the Illinois Attorney General, Respondent