Bruffett v. Gooding County

Bruffett v. Gooding County

Plaintiff:	Brian Bruffett
Defendant:	Gooding County
Case Number:	1:2007cv00358
Filed:	October 31, 2007
Court:	US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office:	Boise - Southern Office
County:	Ada
Presiding Judge:	B. Lynn Winmill
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
August 2, 2010	Filing 62 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 55 ) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment Submission of More Records for Judgment (Dkt. 61 ) is GRANTED to the extent that the Court has considered the re cords in determining whether summary judgment for Defendants should be granted. Plaintiff's claims against Gooding County are DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. 6 ) and this entire case are DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by jm)
February 20, 2010	Filing 54 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Granting in part and Denying in part 49 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Sam Gibbs, Corinet, Chad Kingsland; Denying 53 MOTION to Strike 51 Response to Motion, 49 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Sam Gibbs, Corinet, Chad Kingsland. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by jm)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 2, 2010

Filing 62 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 55 ) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment Submission of More Records for Judgment (Dkt. 61 ) is GRANTED to the extent that the Court has considered the re cords in determining whether summary judgment for Defendants should be granted. Plaintiff's claims against Gooding County are DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. 6 ) and this entire case are DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by jm)

February 20, 2010

Filing 54 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Granting in part and Denying in part 49 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Sam Gibbs, Corinet, Chad Kingsland; Denying 53 MOTION to Strike 51 Response to Motion, 49 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Sam Gibbs, Corinet, Chad Kingsland. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by jm)

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

Search for this case: Bruffett v. Gooding County
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Brian Bruffett
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Gooding County
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| 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?