Courtney v. White et al
| Kenneth L. Courtney |
| Robert White, Matthew Chaudoin and Unknown Officer |
| 3:2009cv00036 |
| March 20, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights Office |
| Jefferson |
| John G. Heyburn |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
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
36
ORDER by Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 8/9/2010; for the reasons set forth in 35 Memorandum Opinion, 28 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is SUSTAINED in part as to Plaintiff's claims related to tight handcuffs. That claim is DISMIS SED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 28 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED as to Plaintiff's claims involving Defendant's use of a leg sweep and spit shield. The Court will set a trial date in the near future. cc:Plaintiff, pro se, Counsel (SC)
|
|
Filing
29
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 2/11/2010; DENYING 24 Motion to Amend/Correct. cc:Plaintiff, pro se, Counsel (SC)
|
|
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 5/8/09; for the reasons set forth, the Court will dismiss all claims against Defendant White and the Official-capacity claims against the remaining Defendants. The Court will allow the individual-capacity claims against Defendant Chaudoin and two unnamed police officers to go forward.cc:Plaintiff, pro se, Defendants, Jefferson County Attorney (SC)
|
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
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.
