Savage v. City of Twin Falls et al
| Michael Coleman Savage |
| City of Twin Falls, Twin Falls City Police Department, Brian Pike, Timothy Arredondo, Isaiah Day and John and Jane Does 1-10 |
| 1:2013cv00179 |
| April 11, 2013 |
| US District Court for the District of Idaho |
| Boise - Southern Office |
| Twin Falls - Southern |
| Edward J. Lodge |
| P.I.: Other |
| 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
84
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 25 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendants' Motion in Limine 72 is DENIED to the extent it seeks exclusion of Savage's expert witness. Defendants are awarded the attorney's costs and fees associated with bringing the Motion in Limine, and are directed to file an affidavit within 7 days from the date of this Order. Defendants' Motion to Strike 81 is DENIED as MOOT. (Jury Trial set for 8/25/2015 09:30 AM in Boise - Courtroom 2 before Judge Edward J. Lodge.). Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (st)
|
|
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Defendants' Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement 32 is DENIED. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (st)
|
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 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.
