MARTEN et al v. OFFICE OF THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL et al
| CHRISTOPHER MARTEN and JANICE S. MARTEN |
| RICK ALBRECHT, INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, OFFICE OF THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL, ANDREW W. SWAIN and UNKNOWN REPRESENTATIVE(S) |
| 1:2012cv00195 |
| February 15, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Tim A. Baker |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
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
197
ENTRY FOLLOWING FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE - The Entry above details the final pretrial discussions, rulings and directions given pursuant to Trial Rule 16. In addition, the Court made the following rulings. The Martens' Motion to Exclude Opinio ns of H. Bryan Callahan is DENIED (Filing No. 145 ). The Martens' Motion for Separation of Witnesses is GRANTED (Filing No. 175 ). The Martens' Motion in Limine is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. (Filing No. 162 ). (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/22/2017. (JLS)
|
|
Filing
55
ENTRY denying 52 Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend/Correct Judgment. The Court filed 51 Judgment against the Martens on June 20, 2013, in which the Court provided a factual background of the issues in this case. See Dkt. 50 . Finding no reason to alter or amend that Judgment, the Motion is DENIED. ***SEE ENTRY***. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/10/2014. (MGG)
|
|
Filing
50
ENTRY on 39 Motion to Dismiss - Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 39) is GRANTED. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/20/2013. (JD)
|
|
Filing
35
ENTRY ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS - Counts I, III, IV, and V are barred by the statute of limitations, therefore, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 14 ) as to these counts is GRANTED with prejudice. Defendants' Motion to Dis miss defendants "Unknown Representatives" is GRANTED with prejudice. Because the Martens failed to allege they complied with the notice requirements of the ITCA as required for Count II, and as pled, Defendants have immunity, Defendants& #039; Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 14 ) for Count II is GRANTED, but without prejudice. Plaintiffs have 14 days from the date of this Entry to file an amended complaint that addresses the ITCA notice requirement and immunity issues discussed in this Entry. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/22/2012. (JD)
|
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.
