Baker v. Woodbridge et al
| L. Lee Whitnum Baker |
| Town of Woodbridge, Robert B. Crowther and Frank P. Cappiello |
| 3:2017cv01362 |
| August 11, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Fairfield |
| Michael P. Shea |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
243
RULING denying 125 Motion to Transfer to Another District; denying 141 Motion to Transfer to Another District; denying 142 Motion to Transfer to Another District; denying 177 Motion to Transfer to Another District; denying 210 Motio. Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 7/11/2019. (Lewis, D)
|
|
Filing
200
RULING: For the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs Motions for Reconsideration (Docs. No. 139 , 145 , and 153 ) are DENIED. The Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. No. 147 ) is GRANTED IN PART. The defendants are ORDERED to submit an affida vit confirming that the copies of the protective orders, located at Exhibit C (Doc. No. 102 -1), pages 610, submitted in response to Whitnums document requests, are complete and accurate. If the submitted documents are not complete and accurate, the defendants shall file a correction of any error along with a statement showing cause why the error should not result in sanctions. The defendants shall submit said affidavit or correction and statement by April 1, 2019.. Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 3/22/2019. (Lewis, D)
|
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.
