King et al v. Williams
| Kevin King and Cheryl King |
| T. Williams |
| 1:2012cv15116 |
| November 19, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Jackson |
| Thomas L. Ludington |
| Laurie J. Michelson |
| 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
81
ORDER Deferring Ruling on Defendant's 65 Motion in Limine and Granting Plaintiffs' 66 , 67 and 68 Motions in Limine. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiffs' 55 MOTION to Re-Open and Compel Discovery. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (Monda, H)
|
|
Filing
50
ORDER (1) Denying Without Prejudice Plaintiffs' 49 MOTION to Reopen Discovery, (2) Conditionally Appointing Counsel, and (3) Staying Case. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (Monda, H)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER Sustaining in Part and Overruling in Part Defendant's 46 Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation; Adopting in Part and Rejecting in Part the 45 Report and Recommendation; and Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's 38 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (Monda, H)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER adopting 22 Report and Recommendation; and denying 14 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (SGam)
|
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 Michigan Eastern 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.
