Simmons v. City of Henderson Police Department
2:2010cv00011 |
January 6, 2010 |
US District Court for the District of Nevada |
Las Vegas Office |
Lawrence R. Leavitt |
Philip M. Pro |
Civil Rights: Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 18 ORDER Granting 6 & 13 Motions to Dismiss. Denying 10 Motion to Amend, 11 to Serve Notice, 12 To Amend Address, and 17 To Join Parties. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 8/6/2010. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SD) |
Filing 2 ORDER Granting 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Clerk of Court shall file the complaint, issue summons, and deliver to the U.S. Marshal for service. Plaintiff shall furnish the U.S. Marshal with the required USM-285 for m within 20 days. Proof of service due within 120 days from the date that the complaint was filed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiff shall serve upon defendants a copy of every document submitted for consideration by the court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leavitt on 5/7/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: plaintiff and USM - 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: Simmons v. City of Henderson Police Department | |
---|---|
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.