COX et al v. THE CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA et al
| OWEN COX, JR. and EVELYN COX |
| THE CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA and THE INDIANAPOLIS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS |
| 1:2009cv00435 |
| April 9, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Civil Rights: Other Office |
| Marion |
| William T. Lawrence |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Defendant |
| 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
127
ENTRY REMANDING CASE TO MARION SUPERIOR COURT - Consistent with the Supreme Court's decision, the Court now finds that there is no equal protection violation. It necessarily follows that this Court's decisions that were based on the rul ing found at Dkt. 66 are no longer good law. As discussed in Dkt. 126 , the Court has VACATED its entry pertaining to damages, found at Dkt. 106 . In addition, the Court VACATES its ruling on the City's Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgme nt, found at Dkt. 95 . As for Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. 114 ), the Court VACATES its August 22, 2011 order on the parties' Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 110 ), since these issues more appropriately rest within the province of the state court. From there, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiffs' Motion to Reconsider (Dkt. 114 ). By doing this, the Court has, in effect, reinstated the parties' motions for summary judgment. Finally, this matter is hereby REMANDED to the Marion Superior Court. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/19/2012.(JD)
|
|
Filing
110
ENTRY ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - For the reasons set forth herein, the City's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 1-3) is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is (Dkt. 1-5) is DENIED. The parties are to collabor ate and notify the Court within 7 days of the date of this entry if they agree that entry of Final Judgment is appropriate. If the parties agree that Final Judgment is appropriate, they are further directed to submit a mutually agreeable proposed Final Judgment at that time. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/22/2011.(JD)
|
|
Filing
106
ENTRY on the Issue of Damages - The Court rules in favor of the City with respect to the method for calculating the refund amount, and with respect to the method for calculating prejudgment interest. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/15/2011.(TRG)
|
|
Filing
95
ENTRY on Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment - For the reasons set forth the 70 Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment is DENIED. (**SEE ENTRY**). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 1/11/2011. (JD)
|
|
Filing
66
ORDER granting 51 Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 55 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 62 Defendants' Motion to Strike. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 6/14/2010. (JHO)
|
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 Southern 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.
