A.M.T. et al v. MURPHY et al
||J. M. G., J. J. M. and A. M. T.
||PATRICIA CASANOVA and ANNE WALTERMAN MURPHY
||March 25, 2010
||US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
||Tim A. Baker
||Sarah Evans Barker
|Nature of Suit:
||Civil Rights: Welfare
|Cause of Action:
||42:1983 Civil Rights Act
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|February 10, 2011
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 64 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 78 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; denying 91 alternative Motion. The Court denies pltfs request for attny fees. The Court grants pltfs request for permanent injunctive relief. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 2/10/2011. (CBU)
|November 22, 2010
ORDER CERTIFYING CLASS ACTION. For the reasons discussed herein, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify Class. Class is certified as described in this Order. The Court hereby DESIGNATES A.M.T., J.J.M, and J.M.G. as the representative pl aintiffs for the certified class and, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g), DESIGNATES Mr. Kenneth Falk and Mr. Gavin Rose as lead class counsel. The Court now ORDERS the parties to meet and confer with one another and, by December 3, 20 10, submit a joint report in this matter setting forth a proposed plan (or alternative plans) as to what notice, if any, should be provided to the class. Additionally, pursuant to docket entry 84, FSSA has until December 1, 2010 to file a response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment. See Order. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 11/22/2010. (LBK)
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
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.
Why Is My Information Online?