DOE v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al
| JOHN DOE |
| DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH REHABILITATION SERVICES and REACH YOUTH SHELTER |
| 1:2008cv00656 |
| April 15, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Washington, DC Office |
| 11001 |
| Paul L. Friedman |
| Both |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
45
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER that Ms. McEachern or other counsel for plaintiff shall file a status report on or before December 17, 2010; if plaintiff is unrepresented by counsel on or before December 17, 2010, he shall show cause in writing by that date why his complaint should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on November 18, 2010. (MA)
|
|
Filing
34
OPINION granting the District's supplemental motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint in part and denying it in part. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on April 19, 2010. (MA)
|
|
Filing
23
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER that the District of Columbia Department of Child & Family Services and the District of Columbia Department of Youth Rehabilitation Service -- but not the District of Columbia -- are dismissed as defendants in this matter. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on April 21, 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.
