McNeil et al v. Omaha, City of et al
| Jamaal A. McNeil, De'Vion Murry and DeAndre' Murry |
| T. Ringhoff, Omaha Police Department, Omaha, City of, J. Warnock, State of Nebraska, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Nebraska Commission Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice and Douglas County |
| 8:2007cv00143 |
| April 17, 2007 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 8 Omaha Office |
| Douglas |
| Richard G. Kopf |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
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
112
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that plaintiff's 110 Motion to unseal is denied as moot. Plaintiff's 111 Motion for Copies is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(ADB)
|
|
Filing
91
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (filing no. 88 )and Motion for Mandamus (filing no. 89 ) are denied without prejudice to reassertion before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Clerk of the court is directed to send a copy of this order to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA)
|
|
Filing
64
STRICKEN PER ORDER 65 - MEMORANDUM AND ORDER-This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike. (Filing No. 60 .) In his Motion, Plaintiff seeks to strike, or withdraw, his Notice of Appeal and related filings. It appears that Plaintiff also sought leave to voluntarily dismiss his appeal from the Eighth Circuit, which granted his request. (Filing No. 61 .) As such, Plaintiff's Motion to Strike is moot. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (filing no. 60 ) is denied. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LKH) Modified on 12/17/2008 to add strike text (BMH).
|
|
Filing
56
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis (filing no. 55 ) is granted. Plaintiff shall pay an initial partial filing fee of $11.35 by December 4, 2008, unless an enlargement of time is granted in resp onse to a written motion. If the initial partial filing fee is not received by the specified deadline, this case is subject to dismissal. After payment of the initial partial filing fee, Plaintiffs institution shall collect the additional monthly pa yments in the manner set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), quoted above, and shall forward those installments to the court. The Clerk of the court is directed to send a copy of this order to the appropriate official at Plaintiff's institution and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copies mailed as directed)(GJG, )
|
|
Filing
41
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER regarding Motion to Dismiss 31 and Response and Motion for Leave 39 . Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Amended Motion to Dismiss (filing no. 39 ) is granted. Clerk to mail copies. Plaintiff shall have 20 days after the receipt of the Amended Motion to Dismiss (filing no. 39 ) and the accompanying brief (filing no. 40 ) to file a response to the Amended Motion to Dismiss, and Defendants shall have five (5) business days after Plaintiff has filed his response to file a reply, if desired. March 7, 2008 Motion to Dismiss (filing no. 39 ) ripe for disposition upon receipt of Defendants' reply. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copies mailed as directed to pro se party)(JAB)
|
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 Nebraska 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.
