Rawls v. Maricopa County, et al
Plaintiff: Vernon Rawls
Defendant: Joe Arpaio, Maricopa, County of, Unknown Murillo, Unknown Solla and Unknown Parties
Case Number: 2:2010cv00231
Filed: February 1, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: G Murray Snow
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
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
July 23, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER that the County's 22 Motion for Reconsideration is denied. It is further ordered that Pla's 25 Request for Dismissal with Prejudice of his § 1983 claim against Sheriff Joseph Arpaio and the County is denied as moot. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 07/23/10.(ESL)
June 22, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER Defendant Murillo's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim 15 is DENIED. Maricopa County's and Joseph Arpaio's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim 5 is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's § 1983 claims and DENIED as to his state-law claim for negligence. Plaintiff's § 1983 claim against the County Defendants is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff will have thirty days (30) or until July 22, 2010, to file an Amended Complaint. Plaintiff shall also file with the Court and the County Defendants a redline version indicating all changes from the Complaint and the Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 6/22/10.(DMT)
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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Rawls v. Maricopa County, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Joe Arpaio
Represented By: Klaus Peter Muthig
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: Maricopa, County of
Represented By: Klaus Peter Muthig
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: Unknown Murillo
Represented By: Klaus Peter Muthig
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: Unknown Solla
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: Unknown Parties
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 ]
Plaintiff: Vernon Rawls
Represented By: Kamille Rae Dean
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?