Grider et al v. City of Russell Springs, Kentucky et al
1:2005cv00137 |
September 9, 2005 |
US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
Bowling Green Office |
Thomas B. Russell |
Civil Rights: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 70 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Thomas B. Russell on 1/31/2011. The Court issued a Memorandum Opinion, 66 , on 11/12/2010 granting in part and denying in part Defendant's motion to compel. The Court directed parties to file in cam era briefs on several issues and declined to address sanctions. The parties filed their briefs for the Court's consideration. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendant's Motion to Compel 49 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Motion for Sanctions 49 is DENIED. cc:counsel (PHB) |
Filing 66 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Thomas B. Russell on 11/12/2010 granting in part and denying in part 49 Motion to Compel. Defendant's motion for Sanctions remains pending. The Parties shall file briefs in compliance with this Memorandum Opinion within (21) twenty one days from the filing of this Order. Brief due by 12/3/2010.cc:counsel, James Faller, II (PHB) |
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 Western 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
Search for this case: Grider et al v. City of Russell Springs, Kentucky et al | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.