Lee v. Tucker et al
| Ryan Lee |
| Todd Tucker, O'Harold Mark, Amanda Weiss and Chad Walker |
| 1:2016cv01569 |
| June 21, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| Douglas |
| Nina Y. Wang |
| 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
31
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang on 7/3/2017. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 16 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; Summary Judgment is GRANTED in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff as to Plainti ff's retaliatory arrest in violation of the First Amendment claim (Claim I), and Claim I is DISMISSED with prejudice; Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff as to Plaintiff's excessive force in viol ation of the Fourth Amendment claim (Claim II) only to the extent it alleges a Fourth Amendment violation based on handcuffing; Summary Judgment is DENIED IN PART and Claim II REMAINS as to the excessive force claim against Defendants Tucker, OHarold , and Weiss and the failure to intervene as to Defendant Walker. In accordance with this Memorandum Opinion and Order, a Final Pretrial Conference is SET for 7/21/2017 03:00 PM in Courtroom C204 before Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang. The Proposed Pretrial Order is due by 7/14/2017. (nywlc2, )
|
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.
