Wooldridge v. Macon Electric Cooperative et al
| Kenneth L. Wooldridge |
| Macon Electric Cooperative, Doug Drake, Harold Beach, Paul LaRue Baker, Larry Robuck, Nena Robuck, Glenda Wood, Kemper Walker, George Phillip Saunders, Eugenia Rice-Pulliam and Richard Kemp |
| 2:2016cv00087 |
| December 1, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Hannibal Office |
| Macon |
| Henry Edward Autrey |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 451 |
| Plaintiff |
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
83
OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that based on Plaintiffs repeated willful interception of attorney-client conversations over an extended period of time and the improper use of his position as a Board member of the disclosure of a privileged communication, this matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE under the Courts inherent authority to impose sanctions. Attorneys fees will not be assessed against Plaintiff. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are DENIED as moot. A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/11/18. (KJS)
|
|
Filing
53
OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Dismiss, [Doc. No. 43 ] is GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Counts I and II are Dismissed. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 5/15/17. (KJS)
|
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 Missouri 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.
