Edwards v. McSwain et al
| Lawrence M. Edwards |
| Ellis McSwain, Robert Gould, Kenneth Hovis, Michael White, Scott O'Kelley and Les Semar |
| 4:2017cv02179 |
| July 27, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| St. Louis Office |
| St. Francois |
| Audrey G. Fleissig |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
172
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. ECF No. 145 . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's motion to strike Plaintiff's declaration is DENIED. ECF No. 159 . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. ECF No. 139 . Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 6/20/2019. (AFC)
|
|
Filing
132
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motions for a temporary restraining order and to stay summary judgment are both DENIED. ECF Nos. 117 & 120 . Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on January 8, 2019. (BRP)
|
|
Filing
131
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion for a protective order is GRANTED. ECF No. 126 . The Protective Order will be issued separately. Plaintiff is cautioned that he must comply with the terms of the Protective Or der and that any violations could result in the imposition of sanctions. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Supplemental Memorandum and Motion to Order" is GRANTED in part, as set forth above. ECF No. 107 . Defendant shall promptly produce the unredacted documents sought by Plaintiff pursuant to the above-noted Protective Order to be issued in this case. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 12/27/18. (KXS)
|
|
Filing
84
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Michael Whites motion to dismiss is GRANTED. [ECF No. 38 ]IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Robert Goulds motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. [ECF No. 57 ]IT IS FURTHER ORDE RED that plaintiffs motion for leave to file his memorandum in opposition to defendant Les Semars motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. [ECF No. 80 ]. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Les Semars motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED. [ECF No. 77 ] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for injunctive relief and emergency hearing of tapes is DENIED. [ECF No. 25 ] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief is DE NIED as moot as plaintiff has entered MOSOP Phase II. [ECF No. 29 ] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to conduct discovery is DENIED without prejudice to refiling after discovery has commenced. [ECF No. 67 ] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that p laintiffs motions for subpoenas are DENIED without prejudice to refiling after discovery has commenced. [ECF Nos. 68 , 69 , 70 , and 71 ] An Order of Partial Dismissal and Order of Partial Judgment will accompany this memorandum and order. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 09/28/2018. (KCB)
|
|
Filing
64
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for clerks entry of default is DENIED. [ECF No. 59 ] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for copies is DENIED without prejudice. [ECF No. 52 ] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for issuance of subpoenas is DENIED without prejudice. [ECF No. 60 ]. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 05/25/2018. (KCB)
|
|
Filing
15
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint, pursuant to the service agreement the Court maintains with the Missouri Attorney Generals Office, as to defendants Les Semar, Michael White, and Robert Gould in their individual capacities. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint as to defendants Ellis McSwain, Kenneth Hovis, and Scott OKelley because, as to these defendants, the complaint is legally frivolous or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or both. Plaintiffs claims against these defendants are DISMISSED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plainti ff's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED without prejudice. [ECF No. 9 ] IT IS FUTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs pro se motion for issuance of subpoenas is DENIED as moot. [ECF No. 12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed in a timely manner or, in the alternative, be allowed to submit a summary judgment motion is DENIED as moot. [ECF No. 13 . Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 12/04/2017. (KCB)
|
|
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff must pay an initial filing fee of $29.00 within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order. 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 original proce eding. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a prisoner civil rights complaint form. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff must file an amended complaint within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order. If plaintiff does not comply with this Order, the Court will dismiss this action without further proceedings. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shirley Padmore Mensah on 8/11/17. (CAR)
|
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.
