Peruta v. Hartford Parking Authority et al
| Edward A. Peruta |
| Hartford Parking Authority, Eleven Parking Enforcement Ofc and Three Ticket Writers |
| 3:2009cv01946 |
| November 30, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Hartford |
| Vanessa L. Bryant |
| Defendant |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Defendant |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
60
ORDER granting 52 Motion for Summary Judgment which the Court construes as a motion for judgment on the pleadings. See attached memorandum of decision. All of Plaintiff's claims as alleged in the Amended Complaint are hereby dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant and close the case. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 8/24/2012. (Fernandez, Melissa)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER granting 12 Defendant Hartford Parking Authority's Motion to Dismiss. The Clerk is directed to terminate Hartford Parking Authority as a Defendant in this action. The Plaintiff is further ordered to identify and serve the individual defe ndants within 28 days of the date of this Order, September 7, 2010, and to file proof of service by such date. Failure to provide proof of service by September 7, 2010 will result in dismissal of all claims against the individual Defendants. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 8/10/10. (Engel, J.)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
