Sliwinski et al v. Burns et al
| Richard Sliwinski and Przemyslaw Jednaki |
| Burns, Paul M. Gunn, Pederson, Christopher Reid, Larry Morello, City of Middletown and Doe |
| 3:2014cv00442 |
| April 4, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Middlesex |
| Jeffrey A. Meyer |
| 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
75
ORDER. The motion for summary judgment by the state police officer defendants (Doc. #55) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Summary judgment is GRANTED as to defendants Sergeant Burns and Troopers Pederson, Reid, Morello and John Doe Troopers #1 to #4. Summary judgment is DENIED as to Trooper Gunn because a genuine issue of fact remains concerning the lawfulness of and his entitlement to qualified immunity for his initial entry into the rectory and, in the alternative, with respect to his se arch of Sliwinski's car. Further facts as developed and found by the jury at trial may warrant a grant of qualified immunity for Gunn with respect to these claims. The motion for summary judgment by the City of Middletown and all of the John Doe Middletown police officers (Doc. #58) is GRANTED by concession and agreement of plaintiffs. See attached ruling. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 8/29/16. (Adriance, S)
|
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 Connecticut 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.
