Patel et al v. Maricopa, County of et al
| Center for Constitutional Rights and Sunita Patel |
| Gary McGuire, Unknown McGuire, Unknown Parties, David Trombi, Unknown Trombi, Maricopa, County of, Joseph M Arpaio, Ava Arpaio, David Hendershott, Anna Hendershott, Brian Sands, Unknown Sands, Unknown Brackman and Chad Brackman |
| 2:2011cv01489 |
| July 28, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Neil V Wake |
| 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
116
ORDER that County Defendants' Motion to Supplement Their Undisputed Statement of Material Facts 111 is denied. That the County Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Probable Cause; Qualified Immunity) 92 , joined by Defendants Hendershott (Doc. 105), is granted. That the Clerk enter judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff and that Plaintiff takes nothing. The Clerk shall terminate this case. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 6/21/12.(DMT)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER: 47 Defendants' (Maricopa County, Arpaio, Sands, Trombi, Brackman, and McGuire) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's malicious prosecution cause of action and otherwise DENIED. See order for complete details. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 2/27/12. (NKS)
|
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 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.
