CALLON et al v. COX et al
1:2009cv01473 |
November 30, 2009 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Civil Rights: Other Office |
Jane Magnus-Stinson |
Larry J. McKinney |
Plaintiff |
Federal Question |
42:1983 Civil Rights Act |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 85 ENTRY on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment - Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 66 ) is GRANTED in part with respect to the Plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment claims, their procedural due process claims, and the state law claim of false imprisonment, but DENIED in part with respect to the Plaintiffs' substantive due process claim and Monell claim. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 1/25/2012.(JD) |
Filing 84 ENTRY on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment - Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 66 ) is GRANTED in part with respect to the Plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment claims, their procedural due process claims, and the state law claim of false imprisonment, but DENIED in part with respect to the Plaintiffs' substantive due process claim and Monell claim. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 1/24/2012. (TRG) |
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
Search for this case: CALLON et al v. COX et al | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.