Bliss et al v. Fisher et al
Bruce Bliss, Bruce Gebhardt and Richard Shaw |
Mark Fisher, John Rhyno, Michael Gould, John Reilly, James Moynihan, Roger Ferris, Thomas Corrigan, Edward Vandette, North Attleborough Electric Department and Town of North Attleborough |
1:2010cv10252 |
February 12, 2010 |
US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
Boston Office |
Bristol |
Edward F. Harrington |
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 97 Senior Judge Edward F. Harrington: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered denying 89 Motion to Alter Judgment. (Folan, Karen) |
Filing 87 Senior Judge Edward F. Harrington: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered. Motions terminated: 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by North Attleborough Electric Department, Thomas Corrigan, Edward Vandette, 52 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by James Moynihan, 62 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by John Rhyno, Town of North Attleborough, Michael Gould, Mark Fisher, John Reilly.(Folan, Karen) |
Filing 49 Senior Judge Edward F. Harrington: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered denying 36 Motion to Quash. (Folan, Karen) |
Filing 35 Senior Judge Edward F. Harrington: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, Motions terminated: 28 MOTION for Order to of Approval to Subpoena the Clerk Magistrate of the Attleboro District Court for a Deposition filed by Bruce Gebhardt, Bruce Bliss, Richard Shaw.(Folan, Karen) |
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 Massachusetts 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.