Dyer, et al. v. Blankenship, et al
Keith Robert Dyer, by and through his personal representative Colleen Kean |
Don Blankenship, Individually and in his capacity as Phelps County Sheriff, William Scott Jones, City of Doolittle, Greg Curtis and Michael Kirn |
4:2007cv02105 |
December 26, 2007 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
St. Louis Office |
Phelps |
Terry I. Adelman |
Civil Rights: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 150 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Don Blankenship, William Scott Jones, the City of Doolittle, Greg Curtis, and Michael Kirns Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 108) is GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part. Summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendants on Counts I, II, III, and IX of the First Amended Complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Darrell Dyers state law claims in Counts IV, V, VI, VII, VIII of the First Amended Complaint are DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Honorable Audrey G. Fleissig on 3/30/2011. (NCL) |
Filing 59 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 51 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Kevin Dyer's motion for leave to amend his complaint 51 is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that paragraphs 78, 96 and 105 are stricken from the First Amended Complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants motion to dismiss 46 isDENIED as moot. Signed by Honorable Rodney W. Sippel on 8/11/09. (ARL) |
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.