Mills et al v. Shouse et al
| A.H., Vickie Hacker and Straven Harris |
| Kelly Shouse, Michael Havicus and Owsley County, Kentucky |
| 6:2018cv00088 |
| March 21, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| London Office |
| Owsley |
| David L. Bunning |
| Hanly A. Ingram |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
93
OPINION & ORDER: The Court confronts Defendants' summary judgment motion as to all counts (DE # 64 ), Plaintiffs' partial dispositive motion as to Counts IV and V (DE # 69 ), and Defendants' motion to exclude certain expert testimony ( DE # 62 ). The Court ORDERS as follows: 1. The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part DE # 64 , on the terms here outlined; 2. The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part DE # 69 ; 3. The Court DENIES, though on terms, DE # 62 ; and 4. The Court DIR ECTS each side to file a status report, covering the listed topics within 21 days: a) Trial readiness (i.e., the anticipated amount of time needed for pretrial preparation); b) Estimated trial length; c) Any periods of likely unavailability in the remainder of 2020 and first half of 2021; d) Amenability to court-involved mediation; and e) Any other matters relevant to pretrial and trial scheduling. Signed by Judge Robert E. Wier on 9/2/2020.(MM)cc: COR
|
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.
