Huminski v. Heretia et al

Plaintiff: Scott Huminski
Defendant: Michael Frazier, Lyn Truitt, Hector Heretia and Surprise, City of
Case Number: 2:2011cv00896
Filed: May 4, 2011
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: David G Campbell
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
May 29, 2012 150 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 95 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and denying all other pending motions. The Clerk shall terminate this action. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 5/29/12.(LSP)
January 19, 2012 108 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER On or before 02/10/12, Plaintiff Scott Huminski shall file a response to Defendants' 95 motion for summary judgment and, if he chooses, a cross-motion for summary judgment. On or before 02/27/12, Defendants shall file a response to Plain tiff's cross-motion for summary judgment and a reply in support of their motion for summary judgment, as a single document. On or before 03/07/12, Plaintiff shall file a reply in support of his cross-motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff's 100 Motion to Strike Summary Judgment Motion is denied. The 103 Motion for Disqualification of Hon. Judge Campbell is denied. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 01/19/12. (see attached pdf for complete details) (ESL)
December 16, 2011 89 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER - Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 75) isdenied. Plaintiff's Motion to Correct Caption (Doc. 76) is granted. The clerk shall correct the caption of this case to reflect the correct spelling of Heredia. Pla intiff's Motion for Clarification or Findings of Law (Doc. 82) is denied. Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Scheduling Order (Doc. 87) is denied.The Court will not dismiss this case on the basis of Defendants stipulation(Doc. 85) or Plaintiffs conditional stipulation (Doc. 88). The clerk isdirected to terminate these stipulations. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 12/16/11.(LAD)
October 27, 2011 74 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 70 Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Pending Appeal. Plaintiff's Notice of Dismissal of Claims (Doc. 72) is ineffective. This case remains in existence and governed by the Case Management Order (Doc. 58). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 10/27/11.(LSP)
October 18, 2011 68 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 55 Plaintiff's Second Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying as moot 62 Plaintiff's Motion to Expedite. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 10/18/11.(DMT)
July 18, 2011 42 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER that Plaintiff's motion to postpone ruling 16 is denied. Plaintiff's motion to amend 6 is denied as stated. Plaintiff's motion for extension of time 8 is granted. Plaintiff's motion for accommodations 24 is denied as stated. Plaintiff's motion for entry of default 33 is denied. The Clerk shall strike Doc. 27 from the docket. Defendants' motion to strike 34 is denied as moot. Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment 21 is denied. Plaintiff's motion to strike 40 is denied as moot. Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings 20 is denied. Plaintiff's motion for sanctions 23 is denied. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 10 is denied. Plaintiff's motion for a TRO 12 ) is denied. Plaintiff's renewed motion for a TRO 32 is denied as moot. A case management conference shall be set by separate order. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 7/18/11.(DMT)
May 25, 2011 13 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff's request for enlargement of time to file a motion to remand (Doc. 6) is denied. 2. The motion to enlarge time to amend (Doc. 6) will be ruled on after it is fully briefed by the parties. The Clerk shall, therefore, not terminate the motion at Doc. 6. (See document for full details). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 5/25/11.(LAD)

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: Huminski v. Heretia et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael Frazier
Represented By: William H Doyle
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: Lyn Truitt
Represented By: William H Doyle
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: Hector Heretia
Represented By: William H Doyle
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: Surprise, City of
Represented By: William H Doyle
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 ]
Plaintiff: Scott Huminski
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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?