Eagle Rock Sanitation, Inc. v. Jefferson County

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Idaho District Court Eagle Rock Sanitation, Inc. v. Jefferson County

Eagle Rock Sanitation, Inc. v. Jefferson County

Plaintiff:	Eagle Rock Sanitation, Inc.
Defendant:	Jefferson County
Case Number:	4:2012cv00100
Filed:	March 1, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office:	Pocatello - Eastern Office
County:	Jefferson - Eastern
Presiding Judge:	Edward J. Lodge
Nature of Suit:	Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
November 22, 2013	Filing 71 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. IT IS ORDERED: Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 26 is DENIED IN PART. The Court GRANTS summary judgment in favor of Plaintiffs on the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summar y Judgment 41 is DENIED AS BEING MOOT. Plaintiffs' Motions to Strike 50 and 58 are deemed MOOT. Plaintiffs' counsel is to submit a proposed judgment consistent with this Order for the Court's approval and entry forthwith. The trial in this matter is VACATED. 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)
May 14, 2013	Filing 40 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting 24 Motion for Leave to Amend Amended Complaint; denying 28 Request for attorney fees. Signed by Judge Candy W. Dale. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjm)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 22, 2013

Filing 71 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. IT IS ORDERED: Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 26 is DENIED IN PART. The Court GRANTS summary judgment in favor of Plaintiffs on the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summar y Judgment 41 is DENIED AS BEING MOOT. Plaintiffs' Motions to Strike 50 and 58 are deemed MOOT. Plaintiffs' counsel is to submit a proposed judgment consistent with this Order for the Court's approval and entry forthwith. The trial in this matter is VACATED. 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)

May 14, 2013

Filing 40 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting 24 Motion for Leave to Amend Amended Complaint; denying 28 Request for attorney fees. Signed by Judge Candy W. Dale. (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: Eagle Rock Sanitation, Inc. v. Jefferson County
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Jefferson County
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 ]
Plaintiff: Eagle Rock Sanitation, Inc.
Represented By:	Donald L Harris
Represented By:	Amanda Elizabeth Ulrich
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?