Harrison v. City of Fort Wayne et al
| Keiona L Harrison |
| City of Fort Wayne, Officer Hollo, Officer Nicklow, Officer Hawthorne and Officer McConnell |
| C Erik Chickedantz |
| 1:2017cv00419 |
| October 5, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| Fort Wayne Office |
| Allen |
| Paul R Cherry |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| 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
150
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 120 Plaintiff's MOTION in Limine, GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 123 Defendants' MOTION in Limine, and GRANTING 131 Defendants' Supplemental MOTION in Limine. It is therefore ORDERED that counsel, those acting on behalf of the parties, and any witnesses shall not refer to the matters excluded pursuant to this Opinion and Order, either directly or indirectly, during voir dire, opening statements, interrogat ion of witnesses, objection, arguments, closing statements, or otherwise, without first obtaining permission of the Court outside the presence or hearing of the jury. Counsel are further ORDERED to warn and caution each and every one of their witnesses to strictly follow these instructions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan L Collins on 10/8/2020. (lhc)
|
|
Filing
92
OPINION AND ORDER: GRANTING 83 MOTION to Strike - Defendants' Motion to Strike Portions of Affidavits of Keiona Harrison, Documents 77-1 and 79-1 filed by Officer Hawthorne, Officer Nicklow, City of Fort Wayne, Officer McConnell, Officer Hollo; DENYING 76 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Keiona L Harrison; GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 65 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Designation of Evidence filed by Officer Hawthorne, Officer Nicklow, City of Fort Wayne, Officer McConnell, Officer Hollo, in that only the claims as outlined survive against Defendants. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan L Collins on 3/31/2020. (lhc)
|
|
Filing
54
OPINION AND ORDER: The Court DENIES without prejudice 51 Plaintiff's Motion to Assert Supplemental Claims Against Defendants Pursuant to Rule 15(d). Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul R Cherry on 11/27/2018. (lhc)
|
|
Filing
42
OPINION AND ORDER: The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint 34 and ORDERS Plaintiff to FILE the First Amended Complaint on or before 9/21/2018. The Court further GRANTS the Renewed Motion for Leave to File Second Proposed Amen ded Answer to Complaint, Counter-Claim, and Jury Demand 32 with relief different than requested. The Court ORDERS that Defendants are granted leave to include the proposed counterclaims in their Answer to the First Amended Complaint, once filed by Plaintiff. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul R Cherry on 9/19/2018. (lhc)
|
|
Filing
30
OPINION AND ORDER: The Court GRANTS the Motion to Reconsider the Court's Ruling on the Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer to Complaint, Counter-Claim, and Jury Demand 21 , and DENIES as moot the Motion for Leave to File Sur-Response 26 . The Court REAFFIRMS the Opinion and Order 20 , but GRANTS Defendants leave to file, on or before 8/9/2018, a renewed motion for leave to amend their answer to bring a counterclaim against Plaintiff based on allegedly defamatory statements she made to Eric Zimmerman and Michael Manuel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul R Cherry on 7/25/2018. (lhc)
|
|
Filing
20
OPINION AND ORDER: DENYING 16 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Answer to Complaint, Counter-Claim, and Jury Demand by Defendants. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul R Cherry on 5/11/2018. (lhc)
|
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.
