Humphrey v. City of Minneapolis et al
Plaintiff: Christopher Humphrey
Defendant: City of Minneapolis and John Doe
Case Number: 0:2024cv00237
Filed: January 30, 2024
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Presiding Judge: Katherine M Menendez
Referring Judge: David T Schultz
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 22, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 22, 2024 Filing 12 STATEMENT INSTEAD OF REDACTED DOCUMENT: Entire Document Confidential for #11 Sealed Document(s) - 11 Exhibit A filed by City of Minneapolis.(Enslin, Mark)
March 22, 2024 Filing 11 SEALED EXHIBIT A re #10 Declaration in Support filed by City of Minneapolis.(Enslin, Mark)
March 22, 2024 Filing 10 Declaration of Mark Enslin in Support of #4 MOTION to Dismiss/General filed by City of Minneapolis.(Enslin, Mark)
March 22, 2024 Filing 9 MEMORANDUM in Support re #4 MOTION to Dismiss/General filed by City of Minneapolis.(Enslin, Mark)
March 12, 2024 Filing 8 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re #4 MOTION to Dismiss/General filed by Christopher Humphrey. (Attachments: #1 LR7.1/LR72.2 Word Count Compliance Certificate, #2 Exhibit(s) 1)(Kelly, Joseph)
February 22, 2024 Filing 7 NOTICE OF HEARING ON MOTION #4 MOTION to Dismiss/General : Motion Hearing set for 4/30/2024 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 14W (MPLS) before Judge Katherine M. Menendez. (Enslin, Mark)
February 20, 2024 Filing 6 PROPOSED ORDER TO JUDGE re #4 MOTION to Dismiss/General filed by City of Minneapolis.(Enslin, Mark)
February 20, 2024 Filing 5 MEMORANDUM in Support re #4 MOTION to Dismiss/General filed by City of Minneapolis.(Enslin, Mark)
February 20, 2024 Filing 4 MOTION to Dismiss/General filed by City of Minneapolis. (Enslin, Mark)
January 30, 2024 Filing 3 Summons Issued as to City of Minneapolis, John Doe. (ACH)
January 30, 2024 Filing 2 (Text-Only) CLERK'S NOTICE OF INITIAL CASE ASSIGNMENT. Case assigned to Judge Katherine M. Menendez per Civil (3rd, 4th - Civil Rights) list, referred to Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz. Please use case number 24-cv-237 KMM/DTS.Notice: All Nongovernmental Corporate Parties must file a #Rule 7.1 Corporate Disclosure Statement. (ACH)
January 30, 2024 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Christopher Humphrey (filing fee $ 405, receipt number AMNDC-10806451) filed by Christopher Humphrey. Filer requests summons issued. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Kelly, Joseph)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Humphrey v. City of Minneapolis et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Christopher Humphrey
Represented By: Joseph A Kelly
Represented By: Rebecca L Duren
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of Minneapolis
Represented By: Mark S Enslin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: John Doe
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?