Mitchell v. Christopher et al
| Wendell R Mitchell |
| Amahdrick D Christopher, Steven Swift, James Korn, Danny Taliaferro, Kenneth Thompson and Raymond Thompson |
| 6:2010cv00287 |
| June 1, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas |
| Tyler Office |
| Anderson |
| Judith K. Guthrie |
| Michael H. Schneider |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
44
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION, and ORDER OF DISMISSAL re 1 Complaint filed by Wendell R Mitchell. ORDERED that the Defendants motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and the case is DISMISSED with prejudice. All other motions not previously ruled on are DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Judith K. Guthrie on 4/13/2011. (gsg)
|
|
Filing
28
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION, and ORDER denying 27 MOTION to Dismiss 12(b)(1) filed by Amahdrick D Christopher. Signed by Magistrate Judge Judith K. Guthrie on 11/22/2010. (gsg)
|
|
Filing
21
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION, and ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL re 1 Complaint filed by Wendell R Mitchell. ORDERED that the Plaintiff may proceed with his excessive use of force claim and supplemental state claims against Sgt. Amahdrick D. Christopher. Danny Taliaferro, Kenneth Thompson, Raymond Thompson, James Korn and Steven Swift terminated. Signed by Magistrate Judge Judith K. Guthrie on 11/5/2010. (gsg)
|
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 Texas Eastern 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.
