Martin v. Patterson et al

Martin v. Patterson et al

Plaintiff:	Anthony Martin
Defendant:	Andre Patterson
Case Number:	5:2012cv00117
Filed:	April 19, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office:	Lexington Office
County:	Madison
Presiding Judge:	Karen K. Caldwell
Nature of Suit:	Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
February 25, 2014	Filing 64 OPINION AND ORDER: (1) Martin's 38 Motion in Limine is DENIED. (2) Patterson's 44 Motion in Limine is GRANTED as to his request that Martin be precluded under collateral estoppel from introducing any evidence intended to contradict th e fact that he resisted arrest and that Martin be precluded form introducing hearsay evidence by a lay witness intended to prove that his wrist was fractured. (3) Patterson's 44 Motion in Limine is otherwise DENIED. (4) Patterson's 55 Motion to Exclude the Shell Mart video is DENIED AS MOOT. (5) Martin's 57 Second Motion in Limine to prevent Patterson from introducing evidence related to his resisting arrest delinquency is DENIED. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on February 24, 2014. (AWD) cc: COR
October 9, 2013	Filing 31 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) GRANTING Patterson's 24 MOTION for Summary Judgment as to the pla's 1983 claim against Patterson in his official capacity & that claim is DISMISSED; (2) the motion is otherwise DENIED. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 10/9/13.(KJR)cc: COR

Date Filed

Document Text

February 25, 2014

Filing 64 OPINION AND ORDER: (1) Martin's 38 Motion in Limine is DENIED. (2) Patterson's 44 Motion in Limine is GRANTED as to his request that Martin be precluded under collateral estoppel from introducing any evidence intended to contradict th e fact that he resisted arrest and that Martin be precluded form introducing hearsay evidence by a lay witness intended to prove that his wrist was fractured. (3) Patterson's 44 Motion in Limine is otherwise DENIED. (4) Patterson's 55 Motion to Exclude the Shell Mart video is DENIED AS MOOT. (5) Martin's 57 Second Motion in Limine to prevent Patterson from introducing evidence related to his resisting arrest delinquency is DENIED. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on February 24, 2014. (AWD) cc: COR

October 9, 2013

Filing 31 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) GRANTING Patterson's 24 MOTION for Summary Judgment as to the pla's 1983 claim against Patterson in his official capacity & that claim is DISMISSED; (2) the motion is otherwise DENIED. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 10/9/13.(KJR)cc: COR

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Martin v. Patterson et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Anthony Martin
Represented By:	Joshua Ryan Kidd
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Andre Patterson
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?