Stroud v. St. Louis City Police Department et al
| Yusuf Tareek Stroud |
| Daniel P. Early, Ralph Campbell, Matthias Hanewinkel, Michael Scego and City of St. Louis |
| 4:2007cv00359 |
| February 21, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| St. Louis Office |
| St. Louis - City |
| Stephen N. Limbaugh |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Defendant |
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
119
MEMORANDUM - In conclusion, the Court find no material issues of fact in dispute, and that as a matter of law, plaintiff's §1983 claims against defendants Earley and Hanewinkle, as contained in Count I of plaintiff's second amended com plaint, to be barred under Heck v. Humphrey, supra. The Court further finds that plaintiff's §1983 claim against the Board and the individual Board members/defendants, as contained in Count III of the plaintiff's second amended complai nt, fails to state a viable claim as these defendants cannot be held liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior. Finally, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff's state-law claims of assault and battery, as well as holding the defendant Board liable under said claims pursuant to the doctrine of respondeat superior, and will dismiss without prejudice Count IV of the plaintiff's second amended complaint. Signed by Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 8/31/11. (LAH)
|
|
Filing
90
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motion for stay 84 be and is GRANTED. This civil cause of action is hereby STAYED pending the final resolution of the federal criminal case, United States of America v. Yusuf Tareek Stroud, Case No. 4:08CR712RWS/FRB. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for extension of discovery deadline 75 and motion for protective order 76 be and are DENIED AS MOOT. However, said motions may be refiled upon the final resolution of the afore-referenced criminal case and thelifting of the stay entered in this civil action. Signed by Honorable Stephen N Limbaugh, Jr on 10/28/09. (LAH, )
|
|
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff shall pay an initial filing fee of $4.50 within thirty (30) days of the date of this O rder. Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable to "Clerk, United States District Court," and to include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration number; (3) the case number;and (4) that the remittance is for an origi nal proceeding. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintiff fails to pay the initial partial filing fee within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order without good cause shown, then this case will be dismissed without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall substitute the City of St. Louis for St. Louis City Police Department as a defendant in this case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1997e(g)(2), defendants shall reply to plaintiff's claims within the time provided by the applicable provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is assigned to Track 5B: Prisoner Standard. Signed by Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh on 3/8/07. (LAH, )
|
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.
