CHEN v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al
| ZHI CHEN |
| DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CHARLES D. MONK, NICOLE HA, CHANCHAM SPEARS and RED ROOF INNS, INC. |
| 1:2008cv00252 |
| February 14, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Washington, DC Office |
| 11001 |
| Paul L. Friedman |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights |
| Both |
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
74
OPINION granting plaintiff's motion for sanctions to the extent that it requests an adverse inference instruction and an award of attorneys' fees and costs, and denying with respect to the specific language that plaintiff proposes for inclusion in the instruction. An order consistent with this opinion shall issue this same day. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on September 9, 2011. Associated Cases: 1:08-cv-00252-PLF, 1:09-cv-01536-PLF(MA)
|
|
Filing
43
MEMORANDUM OPINION granting the District of Columbia's motion to dismiss in part. An order to accompany to this memorandum opinion will issue this same day. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on March 29, 2010. Associated Cases: 1:08-cv-00252-PLF, 1:09-cv-01536-PLF (MA)
|
|
Filing
20
OPINION dismissing plaintiff's negligence claim with respect to Officer Ha. A separate order consistent with this opinion will issue this same day. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on March 25, 2009. (MA)
|
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 District Of Columbia 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.
