Singh, Ph.D v. Cordle, Ph.D et al
| Rajesh Singh |
| David P. Cordle, Michael D. Shonrock, Gwen Alexander, Andrew J.M. Smith and Emporia State University |
| 2:2015cv09369 |
| October 30, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Kansas City Office |
| Lyon |
| Gwynne E. Birzer |
| John W. Lungstrum |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
136
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The plaintiff's motion for leave to take interlocutory appeal 134 is construed as a motion for Rule 54(b) certification and is granted. It is further ordered that the Court's October 12, 2017 Memorandum and Order is final under Rule 54(b) with respect to all claims and issues on which the court granted summary judgment. Signed by District Judge John W. Lungstrum on 11/14/2017. (ses)
|
|
Filing
128
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - It is ordered that 110 defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is denied as to plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against defendant Cordle and is otherwise granted and defendants' motion to exclude expert testimony 113 is moot. Signed by District Judge John W. Lungstrum on 10/12/2017. (ses)
|
|
Filing
96
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 74 Defendants' Motion for Protective Order. See Memorandum and Order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Gwynne E. Birzer on 2/22/17. (sj)
|
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.
