Connecticut v. Williams

Plaintiff: State of Connecticut
Defendant: Rashad L. Williams
Case Number: 3:2017cv02023
Filed: December 5, 2017
Court: Connecticut District Court
Office: New Haven Office
County: Hartford
Presiding Judge: Michael P. Shea
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
March 29, 2018 22 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER. For the reasons set forth in the attached, the 11 motion to remand and for costs and attorney's fees is hereby GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. I remand this case to Connecticut Superior Court but I do not award the State its costs and attorney's fees. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/29/2018. (Self, A.)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Connecticut v. Williams
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: State of Connecticut
Represented By: Stephen R. Finucane
Represented By: Terrence M. O'Neill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Rashad L. Williams
Represented By: Josiah T.D. Butts
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?