Carter v. Chase et al
Plaintiff: |
Keithlan L. Carter |
Defendant: |
Joe Chase, Randy Brooks, Salem, MO Police Department, Dent County Sheriff's Department, Mary Kaufman, Mike Loveday, Jonathan Counts, Christopher Robbins, State of Missouri and Evlynn Unknown |
Case Number: |
4:2017cv02201 |
Filed: |
August 1, 2017 |
Court: |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
Office: |
St. Louis Office |
County: |
Dent |
Presiding Judge: |
Henry Edward Autrey |
Nature of Suit: |
Civil Rights |
Cause of Action: |
42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
Jury Demanded By: |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed |
Document Text |
August 13, 2018 |
Filing
13
OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff=s motion for recusal and to reopen the present matter [#12] is DENIED. 12 Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 8/13/18. (CLA)
|
March 13, 2018 |
Filing
11
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for hearing [Doc. #10] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case will continue to be STAYED pending final disposition of the criminal charges, as well as plaintiffs probatio nary process, any appeals and post-conviction remedies, in State v. Carter, No. 14DE-CR00440-02 (42nd Judicial Circuit, Crawford County Court); State v. Carter, No. 14DE-CR00502-02 (42nd Judicial Circuit, Crawford County Court). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days to notify the Court in writing concerning the final disposition of all criminal charges, as well as plaintiffs probationary process, any appeals and post-conviction remedies, in State v. Carter, No. 14DE-CR 00440-02 (42nd Judicial Circuit, Crawford County Court); State v. Carter, No. 14DE-CR00502-02 (42nd Judicial Circuit, Crawford County Court). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case will continue to be ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED pending final disposition o f the criminal charges against plaintiff, and may be reopened by this Court after a ruling on plaintiffs motion to reopen the case after such final disposition. Response to Court due by 4/13/2018. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 3/13/18. (CLA)
|
December 1, 2017 |
Filing
7
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. # 2 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED no filing fee will be assessed at this time. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all proceedings in t his case are STAYED pending final disposition of the criminal charges, as well as plaintiffs probationary process, any appeals and post-conviction remedies, in State v. Carter, No. 14DE- CR00502 (42nd Judicial Circuit, Dent County Court); State v. Carter, No. 14DE- CR00502-02 (42nd Judicial Circuit, Crawford County Court).IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days to notify the Court in writing concerning the final disposition of all criminal charges, as well as plainti ffs probationary process, any appeals and post-conviction remedies, in State v. Carter, No. 14DE-CR00502 (42nd Judicial Circuit, Dent County Court); State v. Carter, No. 14DE-CR00502-02 (42nd Judicial Circuit, Crawford County Court). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for counsel [Doc. # 3 ] is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED pending final disposition of the criminal charges against plaintiff, and may be reopened by this Court after a ruling on plaintiffs motion to reopen the case after such final disposition. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 12/1/17. (JAB)
|
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
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?