Jones v. Indiana State of et al
| Clinton Jones |
| Indiana State of, Grant County, Grant County Prosecutor's Office and David Payne |
| 1:2008cv00292 |
| December 4, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| Civil Rights: Other Office |
| Grant |
| Roger B Cosbey |
| Theresa L Springmann |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Civil Rights Act |
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
44
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 41 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by David Payne; DENYING AS MOOT 43 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law filed by David Payne. Clerk DIRECTED to enter judgment against Plaintiff Clinton Jones. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 2/4/10. (cer)
|
|
Filing
35
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 21 MOTION to Dismiss by Defendants Indiana State of, Grant County Prosecutor's Office. Defendant David Payne is the only remaining Defendant in this case. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 7/16/09. (cer)
|
|
Filing
34
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 14 MOTION to Dismiss by Defendant Grant County; TERMING 31 MOTION to Not Dismiss Case by Plaintiff Clinton Jones (intended as a Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss). The Grant County Commissioners are DISMISSED from this lawsuit. Defendants State of Indiana, Grant County Prosecutors and Attorney David Payne remain parties in this lawsuit. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 6/10/09. (cer)
|
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 Indiana 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.
