Norman v. B.E.T. Television et al
| LaSandra Norman |
| B.E.T. Television, Steven Hill, Debra Lee and Wendy Williams |
| 2:2016cv00113 |
| April 5, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| Hammond Office |
| Lake |
| Paul R Cherry |
| Robert L Miller |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
48
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 42 B.E.T.'s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and DISMISSES the amended complaint without prejudice. The 47 Motion Proceed to Trial is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Robert L Miller, Jr on 12/5/2016. (cc: L. Norman) (jss)
|
|
Filing
36
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Court GRANTS 32 Motion of B.E.T. Television to clarify and DISMISSES Ms. Norman's complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim against B.E.T. Television upon which relief can be granted. Ms. Norman is AFFORDED twenty days from this date to file an amended complaint. Signed by Judge Robert L Miller, Jr on 7/25/2016. cc: Norman (tc)
|
|
Filing
31
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Court GRANTS 24 Motion to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction against Stephen Hill, Debra Lee, and Wendy (Hunter) Williams. Ms. Norman's claims against defendant B.E.T. Television remain pending. Signed by Judge Robert L Miller, Jr on 7/18/2016. cc: Norman (tc)
|
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.
