DAVIS v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, et al
Plaintiff: MAJOR P. DAVIS, II
Defendant: NICHOLAS GALICO, RICHARD HITE, JOSEPH HOGSETT, INDIANAPOLIS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT and PERRY RENN
Case Number: 1:2016cv00090
Filed: January 11, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Matthew P. Brookman
Presiding Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 56 Entry on Defendants' Motion for Guidance - The Defendants' motion for guidance, (Filing No. 55 ), is granted to the extent that no further action is required by them at this time and further proceedings will be directed as necessary. Th e Clerk is directed to reopen this action on the docket. Davis shall have through June 20, 2017, in which to file a Second Amended Complaint which relies on factual allegations that are not inconsistent with his guilty plea, if such a filing is ap propriate. Davis shall also have through June 20, 2017, in which to explain (show cause) how the filing of this action could be interpreted as anything other than frivolous or malicious. If no such filings are made or if Davis concedes that this action should not continue, the action will be dismissed. (See Entry.) Copy to Petitioner via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/26/2017. (JLS)
March 1, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 53 CLOSED DISMISSED - Entry Concerning Selected Matters and Directing Clerk to Administratively Close Case. The motion to reconsider [dkt. 52 ] is granted. For the reasons explained in the Entry of October 13, 2016, this civil action will not be deve loped until the murder charges now pending against plaintiff Major P. Davis, II, in the Marion Superior Court under Case Number 49G02-1407- MR-034656 are resolved. The parties' are directed to notify this Court when final judgment has been ent ered in the criminal case within 14 days of the date the criminal judgment is entered. The clerk is directed to administratively close this action on the docket. The case will be reopened only after final judgment is entered in the criminal case. (See Entry.) Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/1/2017.(JLS)
October 13, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ENTRY STAYING ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE CRIMINAL ACTION - Counsel has now appeared for all parties in this action.1 Having achieved service to the extent possible, and consistent with the Entry of September 27, 2016, which granted the defen dants' motion to stay, this action is now STAYED on the docket. This action will not be developed until the murder charges now pending against plaintiff Major P. Davis, II, in the Marion Superior Count titled State of Indiana v. Major Davis, Cau se Number 49G02-1407-MR-034656, are resolved. The plaintiff's objections to this ruling [dkt. 43] are overruled. The parties' are directed to notify this Court when final judgment has been entered in the criminal case within 14 days of the date the criminal judgment is entered. The court will then reopen this action on the docket and direct further proceedings. **SEE ORDER** Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/13/2016. (JLS)
September 27, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 38 Entry Discussing Motion to Reconsider - Accordingly, the false arrest claim was properly dismissed and the motion to reconsider [dkt 32] is denied. **SEE ORDER** Copy to Defendant via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/27/2016. (JLS)
July 22, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ENTRY SCREENING AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS - The Clerk is directed to issue process on the City of Indianapolis, Officer Gallico, and the Estate of Perry Renn. The Clerk is directed, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Proced ure 4(c)(3), to issue and serve process on the Defendants in the manner specified by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d)(1). Process shall consist of the Amended Complaint (Filing No. 25), applicable forms and this Entry. The following claims shall proceed: **See Order** Copy to Plaintiff and City of Indianapolis via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 7/22/2016.(JLS) Modified on 7/22/2016 (JLS). Modified on 7/22/2016 (JLS).
January 28, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 11 Entry Dismissing Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings - For the reasons explained below, the complaint must be dismissed because Davis has failed to identify any viable defendant. Davis shall have through February 29, 2016, in which to either file an amended complaint correcting the deficiencies noted above or to show cause why Judgment consistent with this Entry should not issue. See Luevano v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 722 F.3d 1014, 1022 (7th Cir. 2013) ("Without at least an oppo rtunity to amend or to respond to an order to show cause, an IFP applicant's case could be tossed out of court without giving the applicant any timely notice or opportunity to be heard to clarify, contest, or simply request leave to amend.&qu ot;). If an amended complaint is filed, it will be screened. If no amended complaint is filed, this action will be dismissed for the reasons set forth above. (See Order). Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 1/28/2016.(JLS)
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: DAVIS v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: MAJOR P. DAVIS, II
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: NICHOLAS GALICO
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: RICHARD HITE
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: JOSEPH HOGSETT
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: INDIANAPOLIS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
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: PERRY RENN
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?