Harrilal et al v. Magner et al
Case Number: 0:2005cv00461
Filed: March 3, 2005
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Presiding Judge: Joan N. Ericksen
Presiding Judge: Susan R. Nelson
Nature of Suit: Racketeer/Corrupt Organization

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
December 18, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 242 ORDER granting 173 Motion for Summary Judgment., IT IS ORDERED THAT:1.Defendants Motions for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 198 in Civil No. 04-2632, Docket No. 173 in Civil No. 05-461, and Docket No. 166 in Civil No. 05-1348] are GRANTED.2.All Count s in Civil Nos. 04-2632, 05-461, and 05-1348 are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to John Doe, Jane Doe, and Jane Roe.3.Counts VI in Civil Nos. 04-2632, 05-461, and 05-1348 are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the extent they are based on the right to fr eedom from the taking of property without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.4.Count VIII in Civil No. 05-1348 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.5.Except as stated in paragraphs 2-4, all remaining claims in Civil Nos. 04 2632, 05-461, and 05-1348 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.(Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Joan N. Ericksen on December 18, 2008. (slf)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Harrilal et al v. Magner et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?