CLAYTON et al v. MORGAN COUNTY 911 et al
| DARREN CLAYTON and SHELLEY CLAYTON |
| MADISON TOWNSHIP FIRE DEPARTMENT and MORGAN COUNTY 911 |
| INDIANA STATEWIDE 911 BOARD |
| 1:2015cv01564 |
| October 5, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Sarah Evans Barker |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act |
| Both |
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
23
ORDER Approving and Adopting Report and Recommendation on Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand. On November 19, 2015, the Magistrate Judge submitted and filed her Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 21) on the plaintiffs' motion to remand. The parties were afforded the opportunity according to statute and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to file objections to that Report and Recommendation. No party has filed an objection. The Court, having considered the Magistrate Judge's Report an d Recommendation (Dkt. 21) and being duly advised, now APPROVES and ADOPTS it. The plaintiffs' motion for remand (Dkt. 21) is therefore GRANTED as provided in the Report and Recommendation and this Order. The motion to remand filed by Indiana Statewide 911 Board (Dkt. 7) is DENIED AS MOOT. This case is REMANDED to the Morgan County Circuit Court. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 12/4/2015. (BGT)
|
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.
