Olson et al v. City of Aurora, Colorado et al
| Timothy Olson, Mary Ann Lombardi, Crystal Deguzman, Michael Hance, Enrique Nunez, Denise Burke, Marci Strandberg, Quinten Tweed and Sara Lombard |
| City of Aurora, Colorado, Daniel J. Oates, Christen Lertch, Kristopher McDowell, Luke J. Barker, Richard Ray, Brandt A. Smith, Michael David Prince, A. Todd Chanos, Christen (I) Lertch, Kristopher (I) McDowell, Luke (I) J. Barker, Richard (I) Ray, Brandt (I) A. Smith, Michael (I) David Prince and A. (I) Todd Chanos |
| 1:2014cv01362 |
| May 15, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| Denver |
| Richard P. Matsch |
| 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
47
ORDER Pursuant to Procedural Order Number One 45 , a scheduling conference will be held on October 19, 2015, at 2:00 p.m. in the Conference Room, Second Floor, the Byron White United States Courthouse, 1823 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado.. Th e proposed order (original only) on paper, shall be submitted directly to chambers by 4:00 p.m. on October 9, 2015. The conference is conducted with lead counsel present in person. No parties or representatives of parties will be permitted to attend, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 9/17/15. (ktera)
|
|
Filing
45
PROCEDURAL ORDER NUMBER ONE Counsel will meet and confer as required by Rule 26(f)(2) within 30 days from the date of this order. Lead counsel shall attend the conference in person. The disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1)(A) shall be made wit hin 14 days after that conference. The proposed discovery plan will be in the form of the Scheduling Order which will be submitted to chambers in paper form 10 days before the date of the Scheduling Conference. Counsel for the plaintiffs will te lephone chambers within 10 days after the disclosures to set a date and time for a Scheduling Conference pursuant to Rule 16. The instructions for preparation of the Scheduling Order and the form of that order are found at http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/judges/judges.aspx, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 8/14/15. (ktera)
|
|
Filing
44
COURTROOM MINUTES for Motion Hearing held before Judge Richard P. Matsch on 8/13/2015. Denying as moot 16 Defendants City of Aurora, Daniel J. Oates, and Christian Lertch's Partial Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. Daniel J. Oates and Christen Lertch are dismissed as unnecessary parties. Denying 22 Defendant City of Aurora's Partial Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs' counsel concedes the initial stop was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Plaint iffs' first claim for relief is dismissed. Denying 32 Defendants Kristopher McDowell, Luke J. Barker, Richard Ray, Brandt A. Smith, Michael David Prince, A. Todd Chanos, and Christen Lertch's Partial Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint. FTR: K. Terasaki. (ebuch)
|
|
Filing
41
MINUTE ORDER The unopposed motion to vacate the June 30, 2015, hearing is granted. The hearing is rescheduled for August 13, 2015, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom A, Second Floor, the Byron White United States Courthouse, 1823 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 6/19/15.(ktera, )
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER Granting 19 Motion for Leave TO AMEND COMPLAINT: plaintiffs shall file their Amended Complaint and Jury Demand, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 9/4/2014.(jsmit)
|
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 Colorado 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.
