Thurman et al v. Hawkins et al
||John Hawkins, William Lindon and Derran Broyles
||Lori Osborne and Rosemary Thurman
||August 16, 2013
||Kentucky Eastern District Court
||Gregory F. Van Tatenhove
|Nature of Suit:
||Civil Rights: Other
|Cause of Action:
||42:1983 Civil Rights Act
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|September 3, 2014
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER:(1) Sergeant Broyless Motion to Dismiss [R. 9] is GRANTED; (2) All claims against Sergeant Broyles in this action are DISMISSED; (3) The Plaintiffs shall have fourteen (14) days from the entry of this Order to file a mot ion for leave to amend the complaint, or the Court shall enter a final judgment in favor of Sergeant Broyles in this matter; and (4) A separate Order shall enter directing the remaining parties to meet for the conference required by Rule 26(f). Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 9/3/2014.(AKR)cc: COR
|January 7, 2015
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) The summary judgment motions of Troopers William Lindon and John Hawkins [R. 29, 31] are GRANTED; (2) Plaintiffs' federal claims are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (3) The Court declines to exercise supplemen tal jurisdiction; therefore, the state law claims against Troopers Lindon and Hawkins are hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; (4) This case is hereby STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court; and (5) This is a FINAL and APPEALABLE order. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 1/7/2015.(AKR)cc: COR
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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.