Paxton v. State of Idaho et al
Plaintiff: William Eldridge Paxton
Defendant: State of Idaho, Schillings and Gulespie
Case Number: 1:2012cv00136
Filed: March 19, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office: Boise - Southern Office
County: Ada - Southern
Presiding Judge: Ronald E Bush
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 24, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 97 ORDER ON POST-JUDGMENT MOTION. IT IS ORDERED: Plaintiff's post-judment motion for reconsideration is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Clerk of Court shall provide the parties with a copy of this Court's Order found at docket 28 in Ca se No. 1:10-cv-00454-BLW. The Court's Pro Bono Liaison for assistance in finding pro bono counsel for Plaintiff pursuant to the terms of this Order. The Clerk of Court shall provide a courtesy copy of this Order to the Court's Pro Bono Coordinator. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (km)
January 31, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 43 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 28 Plaintiffs Reply to Defendant Response; Plaintiffs Second DiscoveryRequest; Motion for Summary Judgement; granting 29 Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to File Rep ly to Plaintiffs Second Discovery Request and Motion for Summary Judgment; denying as moot 33 Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery; granting in part and denying in part 37 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgmen t. The Reply (Dkt. 31 ) is considered timely filed. The parties shall notify the Court within 30 days whether they wish to proceed with settlement negotiations or litigation (both regarding injunctive relief only). The second amended complaint shall be due within 30 days of the earliest of termination of unsuccessful settlement negotiations or notice that the parties wish to proceed with litigation. If the case is settled, neither a second amended complaint nor an answer will be required. Signed by Judge Ronald E. Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjm)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 Idaho District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Paxton v. State of Idaho et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: William Eldridge Paxton
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: State of Idaho
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Schillings
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Gulespie
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?