Monroe v. City of Lawrence, Kansas et al
| Michael Monroe |
| City of Lawrence, Kansas and Tarik Khatib |
| 2:2013cv02086 |
| February 19, 2013 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Kansas City Office |
| Douglas |
| Eric F. Melgren |
| David J. Waxse |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination) |
| 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
118
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying in part and granting in part 89 Defendants' Motion for Protective Order. The motion is denied in all respects except that it is granted as to limiting the temporal scope of certain discovery. The Scheduling Order is hereby amended to reflect the limits on the temporal scope of certain discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Teresa J. James on 05/13/2014. (ts)
|
|
Filing
76
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 23 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by District Judge Eric F. Melgren on 1/27/2014. (cm)
|
|
Filing
74
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 41 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 12/20/2013. (do)
|
|
Filing
71
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 34 Motion to Stay Discovery. All discovery is hereby stayed as to both Defendants until such time as the Court rules on 23 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 11/21/2013. (do)
|
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 Kansas 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.
