BOYD v. TIPTON POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
| DEREK L. BOYD |
| JAY D. RICH, TIPTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, TONY FRAWLEY, DAVID LACY, OTHER UNKNOWN OFFICERS, OFFICIALS, DAVIN NICHOLS, JOE FARINOLLA and ROBERT NUNEMACHER |
| 1:2020cv01256 |
| April 27, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Tim A Baker |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
343
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO STRIKE AND ISSUING SANCTIONS AND LIMITED FILING BAN - Mr. Boyd's motions to strike, dkts. 341 and 342 , are DENIED. Mr. Boyd is prohibited from filing papers in this closed action until and unless it is remanded by the Court of Appeals. Accordingly, the clerk is DIRECTED to return unfiled any document labeled with this case's title, number, or caption. Any motions pending at the time this order is issued are summarily DENIED. (See Order). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/17/2022. (AKH)
|
|
Filing
293
ENTRY DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING MOTIONS FOR SANCTIONS, AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT - This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Summary Judgm ent, (Dkt. 196 ), and two Motions for Sanctions, (Dkt. 183 , Dkt. 285 ), filed by pro se Plaintiff Derek L. Boyd. Also before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Davin Nichols, David Lacy, and Robert Nunemacher, (Dkt. [2 48]), and a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Joe Farinella), and Jay D. Rich, (Dkt. 260 ). Mr. Boyd initiated this action alleging that law enforcement officers searched his home subject to an invalid warrant in 2017, that he was wron gly arrested and detained because of the search, and the prosecution withheld evidence that would have revealed that the search and arrest lacked probable cause. For the reasons explained above, the Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment, Dkts . 248 , 252 , and 260 , are GRANTED. Mr. Boyd's Motion for Summary Judgment, Dkt. 196 , and his Motions for Sanctions, Dkts. 183 and 285 , are DENIED. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment consistent with this Entry and the Screening Entry, (Dkt. 13 ). (See Order). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/21/2022. (AKH)
|
|
Filing
178
ENTRY DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT - In this civil rights action, Derek Boyd alleges that he was subjected to an unlawful search, arrest, and imprisonment between 2017 and 2019. The action is proceeding with claims against five defe ndants involved in his search, arrest, and prosecution. Mr. Boyd seeks leave to amend his complaint so he may add new defendants and add claims against the existing defendants. Because Mr. Boyd is a prisoner, the Court must screen his proposed amen ded complaint. Mr. Boyd's motion for leave to amend his complaint, dkt. 124 , is DENIED because the amendments he proposes are futile. The action will continue to proceed with the original complaint, dkt. 1 , as the operative pleading and with the claims and defendants recognized in the screening order, dkt. 13 . (SEE ORDER). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/19/2021. (AKH)
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER denying 70 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The action shall continue to proceed with all claims identified in the Screening Order, Dkt. 13 . ***SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION*** Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/7/2021. (JDC)
|
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.
