Benton v. John Doe 1 et al
||John Doe 1 and John Doe 2
||April 9, 2013
||Oregon District Court
||Portland (3) Office
||Janice M. Stewart
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28:1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|April 7, 2014
ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings & Recommendation 34 . Accordingly, Defendant City of Portland's motion to dismiss 20 is granted in part and denied in part as follows: (1) the Second Claim for Relief is dismissed with prejudice as against the City of Portland and John Doe 2 to the extent he is alleged to be a member of the Portland Police Bureau; and (2) the Third Claim for Relief is dismissed without prejudice and with leave to replead within 30 d ays after the date of this Order, to either identify the John Doe Defendants or to clarify the specific factual allegations made against a member of the Portland Police Bureau. See 2-page order attached. Signed on 4/7/2014 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (mr)
|May 14, 2013
ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings & Recommendation 4 . Accordingly, the Complaint 1 is dismissed. Plaintiff's motion for extension of time 7 is construed as a motion to allow sufficient time to file an amended complaint and is granted. Plaintiff has thirty days from the date of this Order in which to file an amended complaint. See 2-page order attached. Signed on 5/14/2013 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. Copy of order mailed to plaintiff. (mr)
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 Oregon 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.