Cohron v. City of Louisvlle, KY. et al
3:2006cv00570 |
November 7, 2006 |
US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
Louisville Office |
Jennifer B. Coffman |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 125 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 112 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 119 for Hearing; granting 120 to resume representation by appointed counsel. Signed by Judge Jennifer B. Coffman on 3/22/12. cc:counsel, Plaintiff (JBM) |
Filing 85 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER denying 81 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 82 Motion for Summary Judgment by Judge Jennifer B. Coffman on 10/14/2010. Clerk to mail cop to pro se plaintiff; status reports due w/in 30 days. cc:counsel (CSD) |
Filing 80 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 58 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 61 Motion for Summary Judgment; Parties may file additional summary judgment motions on the excessive-force claim within 30 days. Parties shall have 20 days to file responses; 10 days to file replies. Clerk to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se plaintiff. Signed by Judge Jennifer B. Coffman on 3/19/10. cc:counsel, Plaintiff (pro se) (JBM) |
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: Cohron v. City of Louisvlle, KY. 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.