Ortlieb v. City of Henderson et al
| 2:2009cv02454 |
| December 30, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Lloyd D. George |
| Peggy A. Leen |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| 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
20
ORDERED that the parties shall file a stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order not later than 5/23/11. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr. on 5/11/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDERED that Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 5) is GRANTED as to Ortlieb's Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment claims and DENIED in all other respects. Signed by Judge Lloyd D. George on 2/18/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER Granting 14 Notice of Change of Attorney filed by Defendants Kyle Slattery, City of Henderson, Henderson Police Department, and Ron Russo, Attorney Nancy D Savage for City of Henderson. Attorney Nancy D Savage substituted in place of Attorney Ronald Sailon. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 11/12/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)
|
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 Nevada 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
| Search for this case: Ortlieb v. City of Henderson et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
