Garrett v. Stanton et al
Plaintiff: Jeanette Garrett
Defendant: Ceonia Stanton, Jr., Jeff Dunn and Pat Donnelly
Case Number: 1:2008cv00175
Filed: April 2, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama
Office: Civil Rights: Other Office
County: Baldwin
Presiding Judge:
Presiding Judge: Bert W. Milling
Presiding Judge: William H. Steele
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 18, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 70 ORDER denying 64 Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment. Signed by Judge William H. Steele on 1/18/10. (tgw)
November 19, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 63 JUDGMENT stating that this action is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge William H. Steele on 11/19/09. Copies to parties on 11/20/09. (mpp)
November 7, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER denying 35 Motion to Alter, Amend or Vacate this Court's October 22, 2008 Order. Signed by Judge William H. Steele on 11/7/08. (srr)
October 22, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER re: the 26 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 13 MOTION to Dismiss. Plaintiff's objections to the R&R are sustained in part, and overruled in part. The Report and Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of this Court insofar as it recommen ds (a) the dismissal of the § 1983 wrongful arrest claim (Count One) and the state-law false imprisonment claim (Count Five) on limitations grounds, and (b) the dismissal of any and all claims against defendants in their official capacities on i mmunity grounds. The Motion to Dismiss (doc. 13) is granted as to those specific claims, and those claims are dismissed. As to the § 1983 malicious prosecution claim (also found in Count One) and the state-law claims of malicious prosecution (Co unt Two), outrage (Count Three), wantonness (Count Four) and civil conspiracy (Count Six), the Report andRecommendation is overruled and the Motion to Dismiss (doc. 13) is denied. The 31 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint is moot as set out. Defendants are hereby ordered to file an answer on or before 11/6/2008. Signed by Judge William H. Steele on 10/22/08. (tgw)
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 Alabama Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Garrett v. Stanton et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jeanette Garrett
Represented By: James G. Curenton, Jr.
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Ceonia Stanton, Jr.
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Jeff Dunn
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Pat Donnelly
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?