Hardy v. Crow et al
| Antonio Hardy |
| John Crow, J. Sewell and Correctional Officer Clark |
| 2:2018cv00056 |
| January 29, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Montgomery Office |
| Elmore |
| Charles S. Coody |
| Other 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
35
OPINION AND ORDER: ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to amend complaint or, in the alternative, to strike (Doc. 30 ) is GRANTED to the extent that plaintiff may file an amended complaint as a separate docket entry within seven days of the date of this order. Defendants shall file their response within 14 days of the date on which the amended complaint is filed. Plaintiff's second motion for leave to amend (Doc. 31 ) is DENIED as moot. It is further ORDERED defendants' ; motion to stay discovery pending resolution of the dispositive immunity issue (Doc. 28 ) is DENIED. The parties are directed to proceed with discovery. It is further ORDERED that defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 29 ) is DENIED without prejudice, and defendant's motion to clarify (Doc. 32 ) is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that defendants' unopposed motion to extend deadline to file dispositive motions (Doc. 34 ) is GRANTED. The court will enter an amended scheduling order with new deadlines. Signed by Honorable Judge Susan Russ Walker on 4/23/2019. (kh, )
|
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 Alabama Middle 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.
