Locke v. Flores

Plaintiff: Adam A Locke
Defendant: Anthony Flores
Case Number: 2:2010cv00430
Filed: May 19, 2010
Court: Wisconsin Eastern District Court
Office: Milwaukee Office
County: Waukesha
Presiding Judge: J P Stadtmueller
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
March 27, 2013 100 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 3/27/13: denying without prejudice 85 plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment; denying without prejudice 62 & 71 plaintiff's Motions for Service; denying without prejudice 70 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel; and denying 72 defendant Mya Haessig's Motion for Summary Judgment. (cc: plaintiff, all counsel) (nm)

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 Wisconsin Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Locke v. Flores
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Adam A Locke
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Anthony Flores
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.