Anderson v. Flemming et al
| Earl Lewis Anderson, Jr. |
| Maurice Flemming, Eddie Edison, Faben Riley, Jerry Davis, Charles Lawrence, Patricia Watts Dean, Alberta Santa Cruz, Ken Brown, Attorney General State of Mississippi and All Defendants |
| 3:2016cv00037 |
| January 25, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi |
| Northern (Jackson) Office |
| Holmes |
| F. Keith Ball |
| Daniel P. Jordan |
| Other Personal Injury |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 |
| None |
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 denying 48 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 48 Motion to Consolidate Cases; denying 48 Motion for Reconsideration; granting 52 Motion to Dismiss; granting 52 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; denying 60 Motion for Transfer into Federal Custody; denying 71 Motion to Amend/Correct; adopting as modified 74 Report and Recommendations as set out in the Order. Signed by Chief District Judge Daniel P. Jordan III on February 2, 2018. (SP)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, for Summary Judgment, or to Require More Definite Statement 17 is granted to the extent she seeks referral to the Magistrate Judge for a Spears hearing. The motion is otherwise denied without prejudice to reasserting these dispositive issues. Signed by District Judge Daniel P. Jordan III on May 31, 2017. (SP)
|
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 Mississippi Southern 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.
