Morgal v. Jacobs et al
Allan Kenneth Morgal |
Anna M Jacobs, Edward Williams, Karyn E Klausner, Therese Schroeder, Charles L Ryan, Cheryl Dossett, Richard Pratt and Unknown Parties |
4:2012cv00280 |
April 16, 2012 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Tucson Division Office |
Pima |
Pro Se (Tucson) |
Cindy K Jorgenson |
Prisoner: Prison Condition |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 209 ORDER: Morgal's Objection to Costs (Doc. 205 ) is Sustained in Part and Overruled in Part. The Judgment on Taxation of Costs (Doc. 204 ) is VACATED. The Clerk of Court is directed to issue a Judgment on Taxation of Costs with costs taxed for Williams and against Morgal in the amount of $1,000. Signed by Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 10/18/2016. (See attached PDF for complete information)(DLC) |
Filing 185 ORDER denying 184 Motion for Reconsideration.(CKJ, ej) |
Filing 183 ORDER granting 127 Motion in Limine No. 1 to Preclude Plaintiffs Expert Eldon Vails Opinions and Report; granting 130 Motion in Limine No. 4 to Preclude Admission of Racial Disparity Testimony; granting 136 Motion in Limine #1: to Exclude Expe rt Opinions of Cameron Lindsay; granting in part and denying in part 137 Motion in Limine #2: to Exclude Evidence of Irrelevant Instances of Conduct and Discipline of Plaintiff Allan K. Morgal, and; granting in part and denying in part 141 Motion in Limine #6: to Exclude Criminal History.(CKJ, ej) |
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.