Pentel et al v. Shepard et al
| Randolph Pentel, Kim Povolny, Michelle Povolny and Michael Povolny |
| Michael Shepard and City of Mendota Heights |
| 0:2018cv01447 |
| May 25, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| DMN Office |
| Dakota |
| Tony N. Leung |
| Patrick J. Schiltz |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 2724 |
| Both |
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
101
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION as Modified 95 . The Settling Plaintiffs' motion for reasonable attorneys' fees and costs 66 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Settling Plaintiffs are awarded $25,247.60 in attorney s' fees and $264.76 in costs against Defendants the City of Mendota Heights and Michael Shepard. Defendants the City of Mendota Heights and Michael Shepard are hereby ORDERED to remit to the Settling Plaintiffs $25,247.60 in attorneys' fees and $264.76 in costs. Signed by Judge Nancy E. Brasel on 12/20/2019. (KMW)
|
|
Filing
100
ORDER. The Plaintiffs' objections to the Order 90 are DENIED. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Nancy E. Brasel on 11/13/2019. (KMW)
|
|
Filing
90
ORDER denying 33 Motion to Compel. (Written Opinion) Signed by Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung on 8/7/2019. (EB)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER on 19 Stipulation for Protective Order & PROTECTIVE ORDER (Written Opinion). Signed by Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung on 9/10/2018. (EB)
|
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 Minnesota 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.
