RIDDLE v. CITY OF COLUMBUS et al
| CHRISTOPHER RIDDLE |
| CITY OF COLUMBUS, CLAPP, COLUMBUS REGIONAL HOSPITAL, DICKMAN, KUSHMAN, LINNEWEBER, MORPHEW, JESSICA MURPHY, QUESENBERY, VELTEN and WRIGHT |
| 1:2017cv04731 |
| December 22, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Sarah Evans Barker |
| Mark J. Dinsmore |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
72
ORDER - granting 64 Motion for Summary Judgment; For the foregoing reasons, a valid warrant was obtained before Mr. Riddle's blood was drawn. The defendants therefore did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights and they are entitled to sum mary judgment on his claims. The motion for summary judgment, dkt. 64 , is granted. Judgment consistent with this order and the order granting Jessica Murphy's motion for summary judgment shall now issue. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 7/3/2019 7/5/2019. Copy Mailed. (CKM)
|
|
Filing
68
ORDER - Granting Defendant Murphy's Motion for Summary Judgment; Jessica Murphy's motion for summary judgment, dkt. 42 , is granted. No partial final judgment shall issue as to the claim resolved in this Order. The clerk shall terminate Jessica Murphy as a defendant on the docket. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 3/26/2019. Copy Mailed. (CKM)
|
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.
