Easley v. Little et al
| Dave Easley |
| Kristal Little, Gary Haywood, Sarah Warren, Rosie Clagg, Frazie and Dana Judd |
| 1:2014cv00891 |
| November 20, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Cincinnati Office |
| SCIOTO |
| Sandra S Beckwith |
| Stephanie K. Bowman |
| 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
63
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 62 ; granting defendants' motion for summary judgment. All pending motions are denied as moot. Signed by Judge Sandra S Beckwith on 7/25/16. (mb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation 8 . The following claims are DISMISSED on the ground that plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted by this Court: 1) Plaintiffs claims against defendants Sarah Warren, Lt. Frazi e and Dana Judd; and 2) any claim against defendant Kristal Little based on a disciplinary sanction that was imposed as a result of an allegedly incorrect charge lodged against plaintiff by Little. Signed by Judge Sandra S Beckwith on 1/20/15. (mb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
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 Ohio Southern 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.
