BEAN et al v. INDIANA UNIVERSITY et al
Plaintiff: RICHARD BEAN and LYNETTE HILDER
Defendant: INDIANA UNIVERSITY, GARTH VAN LEEUWEN, OFFICER ZAHASKY and THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON
Case Number: 1:2011cv00376
Filed: March 17, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Sarah Evans Barker
Presiding Judge: Mark J. Dinsmore
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 30, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER granting 25 University Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs' claims against Officer Van Leeuwen under 42 USC 1983 are dismissed WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs' state tort claims against the University Defendants based on the principle of respondeat superior for Officer Van Leeuwen's alleged violations of Indiana law are didmissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Mr. Bean's Fourth Amendement excessive force and false arrest claims remain since they were not addressed in the Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's counsel shall inform the Court within 30 days as to how Plaintiffs wish to proceed with this litigation. See entry for further details and additional deadlines. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 3/30/2012. (PGS)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: BEAN et al v. INDIANA UNIVERSITY et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: INDIANA UNIVERSITY
Represented By: Abram B. Gregory
Represented By: James R. A. Dawson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: GARTH VAN LEEUWEN
Represented By: James R. A. Dawson
Represented By: Abram B. Gregory
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: OFFICER ZAHASKY
Represented By: Rosemary L. Borek
Represented By: James S. Stephenson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON
Represented By: Rosemary L. Borek
Represented By: James S. Stephenson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: RICHARD BEAN
Represented By: Jeffrey S. McQuary
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: LYNETTE HILDER
Represented By: Jeffrey S. McQuary
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.


Why Is My Information Online?