Michel v. The Town of Hampden et al
| Thomas Michel |
| The Town of Hampden, The Hamdpen Police Department, Todd Ely, Michael Cooney, William Joy, Daniel Devine and Jeff W. Farnsworth |
| 3:2010cv30213 |
| November 9, 2010 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Springfield Office |
| Hampden |
| Michael A Ponsor |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
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
28
Judge Michael A. Ponsor: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered. ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Action on motion: For the foregoing reasons, the Court upon de novo review hereby ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Neiman's Report and Recommendation - 21 , ex cept as to the recommendation that Count Three be dismissed against the Town of Hampden. The court hereby ALLOWS Deft's motion to dismiss - 11 in part. Specifically, the court allows the motion to dismiss as to (1) Count One, with the exceptio n of the unreasonable search and seizure claim against the Town of Hampden only; (2) Count Two against the Hampden Police Department and Farnsworth; (3) Count Three against the Hampden Police Department and Farnsworth; (4) Count Four; (5) Count Five; (6) Count Six; and (7) Count Seven. The Court denies the motion to dismiss as to the unreasonable search and seizure claims against the Town of Hampden in Counts One, Two and Three. The case is referred to Magistrate Judge Neiman for a scheduling conf.
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
