Jones et al v. Lamkin
| Mallory C. Jones and Troy A. Moses |
| Ramone Lamkin and Augusta-Richmond County, Georgia |
| 1:2017cv00003 |
| January 6, 2017 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia |
| Augusta Office |
| Richmond |
| Brian K. Epps |
| J. Randal Hall |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
72
ORDER granting in part 38 Motion to Compel. The Court COMPELS Marshal Lamkin to testify regarding conversations with Ms. Smitherman before his term of office began since no attorney-client relationship existed at that time, FINDS the Answer denial s at issue are either legal in nature or already covered in Marshal Lamkin's first deposition, and FINDS sanctions and an award of attorney's fees are inappropriate. The Court finds as moot 44 Motion for Leave to File. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 04/11/2018. (maa)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER denying 34 Motion to Strike. Signed by Chief Judge J. Randal Hall on 01/25/2018. (maa)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER denying 7 Motion to Dismiss and Lifts the stay of discovery in this case. Signed by Chief Judge J. Randal Hall on 6/29/17. (cmr)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER staying discovery pending the resolution of the motion to dismiss by the District Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 4/17/17. (cmr)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Georgia Southern 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.
