Huminski v. State of Vermont et al
Scott Huminski |
Police Officer Hector Heredia, Office Hector Heredia, Lt. Harold Brady, Lt. John Bacon, Surprise Police Department, City of Surprise, Arizona, Detective Pete Trehan, Wilton Police Department, Town of Wilton Connecticut, Detective Debra Hartin, Gilbert Police Department, Town of Gilbert, Arizona, William Wright, John Lavoie, William Sorrell, State of Vermont, City of Norwalk, Connecticut, Norwalk Police Department, Maricoa County Attorney's Office and Detective Walker |
2:2013cv00692 |
September 26, 2013 |
US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
Ft. Myers Office |
XX US, Outside State |
John E. Steele |
Douglas N. Frazier |
Other Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 117 OPINION AND ORDER denying 97 motion for recusal; denying 98 motion to amend/correct; denying 99 Motion to Vacate orders; denying 100 Motion for temporary restraining order; denying 101 Motion for temporary restraining order; denying [1 02] Motion for temporary restraining order; denying 103 Motion for Order to Show Cause; denying as moot 104 Motion for temporary restraining order; denying as moot 105 Motion for Order to Show Cause; denying 106 Motion to join as additio nal defendants; denying; denying 109 Motion to certify issue for appeal; denying 110 Motion for temporary restraining order; denying as moot 111 motion for issuance of summonses; denying as moot 114 Motion for temporary restraining order; denying 116 motion for recusal and motion for special re-appointment of Hon. Alan S. Gold; dismissing 94 Third Amended Complaint and Partial Dismissal of Case. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 5/20/2014. (RKR) |
Filing 87 ORDER striking 76 Second Amended Complaint and plaintiff may file a Third Amended Complaint pursuant to the directions provided within 21 days of this Order; denying 77 motion to appoint Judge Gold, motion for recusal; denying as moot 78 Moti on to waive formal service; denying as moot 80 Motion for summary judgment; denying 83 Motion to Vacate order of 1/29/2014; denying as moot 84 Motion for summary judgment; denying as moot 85 Motion for TRO. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 2/3/2014. (RKR) |
Filing 74 OPINION AND ORDER denying 61 Motion for TRO; denying 14 and 63 Motions for Preliminary Injunction; denying 15 Motion for Hearing; denying 21 , 22 , 23 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 36 , 37 , 48 , 50 , 52 , and 65 Motions for Partial Summary J udgment; denying 71 Motion to Suspend and Stay All Statutes of Limitations; denying 66 and 68 Motions for Recusal; denying 17 and 40 Motions for Accommodations; denying 44 and 46 Motions to Construe the Entire Record as Pleadings; denyi ng 5 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying 6 Motion to Permit Electronic Filing; denying 18 and 39 Motions to Dispose of All Motions Concurrently with the Motion for Preliminary Injunction and to Certify those Issues for Appeal; denying 24 and 29 Motions to Certify Questions of Law to the Supreme Courts of Arizona, Connecticut, and Vermont; denying 64 Motion to Stay; denying 73 Motion to Take Judicial Notice of Supreme Court Petition; denying 20 and 34 Motions to Post this Case at "Pro Bono Opportunities" U.S.D.C. Website; denying 70 Motion to Sever; granting 19 , 38 , and 43 Motions for Leave to Amend. Plaintiff may file a second amended complaint within 21 days of this Opinion and Order. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 1/15/2014. (MAB) |
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 Florida Middle 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.