Miller v. Mohave, County of et al
| Joe Miller |
| Arizona, State of, Friend Walker and Elaine Grissom |
| 3:2011cv08182 |
| November 17, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Prescott Division Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Frederick J Martone |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 |
| 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
80
ORDER GRANTING defendant's Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (doc. 70 ). It is further ORDERED DENYING plaintiff's counsels' Motion for Reconsideration (doc. 75 ). Pursuant to ER 1.16(c), counsel shall represent plaintiff thro ugh the entry of final judgment. Thereafter, counsel may move to withdraw again. See LRCiv 83.3(a). It is further ORDERED DISMISSING this action with prejudice, each side to bear its own attorneys' fees and costs. The clerk shall enter final judgment. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 1/30/2013.(KMG)
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART defendants' motion to dismiss (doc. 18 ). It is ordered granting defendants motion to dismiss Count III (intentional interference with contract), Count IV (intentional infliction of emotional distress ), and the Mohave Probation Department as a defendant. It is further ordered denying defendants' motion to dismiss Count I (first amendment), and denying Grissom's claim for qualified immunity. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 3/29/2012.(KMG)
|
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.
