Smith v. Daniels et al
| Arlanda Arnay Smith |
| Solomon Daniels, Jacquiline Phillips and Dekalb County Sheriff's Office |
| 1:2007cv02166 |
| September 4, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
| Atlanta Office |
| De Kalb |
| Richard W. Story |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
163
ORDER denying 153 Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs request for a hearing in regard to sanctions (Doc. No. 161 at 12) is GRANTED, and, during the pretrial conference, set for February 17, 2011 at 9:30 a.m., the parties may be heard regarding the amount of sanctions to be imposed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time in which to reply 160 is GRANTED, nunc pro tunc, and Plaintiffs 157 motion for leave of absence from January 17, 2011 through February 3, 2011 is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Richard W. Story on 2/2/11. (cem)
|
|
Filing
151
ORDER that Defendants objection 133 to Plaintiff's affidavit and notices is SUSTAINED, Defendant's motion 136 to strike Plaintiff's affidavit is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's affidavit and notices 130 131 132 are HEREBY STRIC KEN. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion 138 for an extension of timeto file affidavits and evidentiary material; Plaintiff's motion 139 to strikethe affidavit of Dentist Bridget Pollock, his own deposition, and all of his medical re cords submitted by Defendants; and Plaintiff's motion 145 for leave to file an amended complaint are DENIED. IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' cross motion for sanctions 147 is GRANTED, subject to Defendants submitting an affidavit from co unsel showing the time spent in preparing (documents)filed 10/13/10 and 11/08/10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants motion 121 forsummary judgment is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part as follows: Defendants' motion is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's individual capacity claimsagainst Defendants regarding their alleged initial use of force to Plaintiff's head and the use of pepper spray, which occurred before Phillips turned on the bedroom light, and Defendants' motion otherwise is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to terminate the DeKalb County Sheriff's Office as a defendant in this action. Signed by Judge Richard W. Story on 11/24/2010. (pdw)
|
|
Filing
76
ORDER GRANTING IN PART 60 Motion for a Protection Order, and Defendants are not to disclose Plaintiff's protected health information to any non-party or non-parties without prior authorization from this Court or some other court of competent j urisdiction and to return any and all copies of Plaintiff's protected health information to Plaintiff immediately at the close of this case; DENYING 61 Motion to Amend; DENYING AS MOOT 62 Motion to Compel; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PAR T 64 Motion to Amend Complaint; GRANTING 69 Motion for copy of civil docket; DENYING 71 Motion to Appoint Counsel. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to seal Plaintiffs health records contained in 58 , attachments, at the close of this action. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to send Plaintiff a copy of the docket for this action and to AMEND the style of this action to reflect that Defendants Solomon Daniels and Jacquiline Phillips are being sued in their individual capacity and in their official capacity as Deputy Sheriffs of the DeKalb County Sheriffs Office. Signed by Judge Richard W. Story on 7/8/09. (ekb)
|
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 Georgia Northern 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.
