Morgan v. Robinson et al
| Donald Morgan |
| Michael Robinson and Washington County, Nebraska |
| 8:2014cv00212 |
| July 23, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 8 Omaha Office |
| Joseph F. Bataillon |
| Thomas D. Thalken |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| 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
151
ORDER TO WITHDRAW EXHIBITS OR TO SHOW CAUSE WHY EXHIBITS SHOULD NOT BE DESTROYED regarding Exhibit List 35 of Motion Hearing 34 . If counsel fails to withdraw these exhibits within 14 calendar day as directed or to show cause why the exhibits should not be destroyed, the clerk's office is directed to destroy the listed exhibits without further notice to the parties or order from the court. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (ADB)
|
|
Filing
150
ORDER: Counsel for the defendants notified the court on December 8, 2020 that counsel wishes the exhibits from the motion hearing held 10/10/2014 be destroyed. Pursuant NECivR 79.1(f) or NECrimR 55.1(g), if counsel fails to show cause why the exhibits should not be destroyed, the clerk's office is directed to destroy the above-listed exhibits 14 days from the date of this order. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (ADB)
|
|
Filing
67
ORDER regarding 62 Motion to Compel Arbitration. The defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration (Filing No. 62) is denied. The stay of this case is lifted. The defendants shall have until October 19, 2015, to file an answer or otherwise respond to the plaintiff's Complaint (Filing No. 1). The parties shall have until November 3, 2015, to file a planning report as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (SLP)
|
|
Filing
60
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT: Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment, Filing No. 38 , is denied. Plaintiffs motion for a stay, Filing No. 41 , is denied. Defendants motions to strike, Filing Nos. 46 and 47 , are denied. Defendants motion to dismiss, Filing No. 56 , is denied. The magistrate judge shall proceed to progress this case on the constitutional issues remaining herein. The stay in this case is lifted. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (TCL )
|
|
Filing
36
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT: Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order or a permanent injunction, Filing No. 12 , is denied. Defendant's motion to stay or dismiss, Filing No. 15 , is granted as to the stay and denied as to the motion to dismiss. Defendant's motion to strike, Filing No. 19 , is denied as moot. Defendant's motion to compel arbitration, Filing No. 23 , is granted. Defendant's motion to strike, Filing No. 30 , is denied as moot. The parties are ordered to file a status report every 60 days from the date of this order updating the Court on the arbitration proceedings. The parties are further ordered to immediately notify this Court when the arbitration process is complete and indicate what further action, if any, needs to be taken in this case. This case is stayed until further notice by this Court. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (TCL )
|
|
Filing
33
ORDER granting 32 Motion for Leave to File Supporting Affidavit Out of Time. Plaintiff's Supplemental Index of Evidence with attached Affidavit 29 shall be permitted. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (JSF)
|
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 Nebraska 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.
