Harris v. Watson et al
| William A Harris |
| City of Danville and Troy Watson |
| 2:2014cv02224 |
| September 15, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Urbana Office |
| Vermilion |
| Sara Darrow |
| Jonathan E. Hawley |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
6
MERIT REVIEW OPINION - Entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 11/19/2014. Rule 16 Deadline 1/18/2015. Pursuant to its merit review of the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the court finds the plaintiff alleges: a) Defendant Troy Watson used exces sive force against the plaintiff on September 18, 2014 in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights; and b) a state law indemnification claim against the City of Danville. Any additional claims shall not be included in the case, except at the Courts discretion on motion by a party for good cause shown or pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. This case is now in the process of service. The clerk is directed to enter the standard order granting the plaintiff's in forma pauper is petition and assessing an initial partial filing fee, if not already done, and to attempt service on the defendants pursuant to the standard procedures.The Clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. (LN, ilcd)
|
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 Illinois Central 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.
