Redd v. Lutgen et al
| Troy Redd |
| Dustin Lutgen, Mary Dick, Cornell Smith, John Baldwin and Taha Tawill |
| 3:2011cv03046 |
| September 12, 2011 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa |
| Central Division Office |
| Webster |
| Mark W Bennett |
| Paul A Zoss |
| Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
32
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Accepting 28 and 30 Report and Recommendation denying 26 Pro Se Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order filed by Troy Redd and granting 11 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Cornel l Smith, Mary Dick, Taha Tawil, Dustin Lutgen, John Baldwin. It is Further Ordered that this case is dismissed with prejudice and that judgment shall enter in favor of the defendants and against Redd. Signed by Judge Mark W Bennett on 1/23/2014. (Copy w/NEF mailed to Plaintiff Troy Redd) (des)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER denying 19 Appeal of Magistrate Judge Decision to District Court. Plaintiff Troy Redds objections to the denial of appointment of counsel in his August 30, 2013, 19 pro se Motion Petitioning The Court For An Appeal Hearing For Further Revi ew Of Appointment Of Counsel are overruled, and United States Magistrate Judge Leonard T. Strands August 20, 2013, 14 Order, denying Redds 10 Second Motion For Appointment Of Counsel, is affirmed. Signed by Judge Mark W Bennett on 10/23/13. (copy w/NEF to plaintiff) (djs)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Iowa Northern 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.
