Bailey v. USA et al
| Larry R. Bailey |
| USA, Tom Vilsack, Tom Tidwell, Dan Olsen and Jason Nedlo |
| 6:2017cv00090 |
| April 11, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| London Office |
| Laurel |
| Hanly A. Ingram |
| Danny C. Reeves |
| Other Statutes: Administrative Procedures Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision |
| 05 U.S.C. ยง 702 Administrative Procedure Act |
| 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
78
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: ORDERED as follows: 1. The defendants' motion for summary judgment [Record No. 62 ] is GRANTED.2. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Record No. 65 ] is DENIED. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 04/30/2019.(KJA)cc: COR, pro se filer via US Mail
|
|
Filing
52
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1) Pla's motion to strike the Answer 44 is DENIED; 2) Pla's motion to extend time to file a motion for leave to engage in discovery 51 is GRANTED, in part. Pla Bailey shall file a motion for leave to engage in discovery on or before 12/26/18. Court does not anticipate granting further extensions for this reason. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 12/17/18.(MRS)cc: COR, Pro se filer
|
|
Filing
14
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: ORDERED that the defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Record No. 10 is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 7/24/17.(MRS)cc: COR, Pro se filer
|
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 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.
