King v. Barton et al
Plaintiff: Matthew J. King
Defendant: William Barton, Paula Moyers and Scott Jordan
Case Number: 4:2010cv02141
Filed: November 12, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Francois
Presiding Judge: Mary Ann L. Medler
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 8, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 132 MEMORANDUM OPINION: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant William Barton's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 118) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Scott Jordan's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 119) is DENIED with respect to Count I of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint and GRANTED with respect to Count II of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shirley P. Mensah on 10/8/13. (LGK)
July 13, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 20 MEMORANDUM OPINION re: 11 MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Defendant Scott Jordan, Defendant Paula Moyers, Defendant William Barton; The court finds that Plaintiff has failed to allege factswhich affirmatively and plausibly suggest that he has a caus e of action against Defendants in their official capacities. Additionally, the court finds, based on the allegations of Plaintiffs Complaint, that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity in regard to claims against themin their individual capacities. The court finds, therefore, that Defendants Motion to Dismiss should be granted in its entirety. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mary Ann L. Medler on 7/13/11. (RAK)
February 25, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 4 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. #3] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED t hat, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g)(2), defendant shall reply to plaintiffs claims within the time provided by the applicable provisions of Rule 12(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is assigned to Track 5B. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mary Ann L. Medler on 2/25/11. (LAH)
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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: King v. Barton 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: Matthew J. King
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: William Barton
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: Paula Moyers
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: Scott Jordan
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?