Cottle et al v. Gillispie et al
| 2:2010cv00271 |
| February 25, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Peggy A. Leen |
| James C. Mahan |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner 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
119
ORDER Granting 111 Motion for Summary Judgment. Granting 118 Motion to Strike 117 sur-reply. Clerk of the court enter judgment in favor of the moving defendants and against plaintiff as appropriate. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 4/19/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)
|
|
Filing
87
AMENDED ORDER and Amended Scheduling Order. Discovery due by 2/13/2012. Motions due by 3/5/2012. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 4/5/2012. Plaintiffs Motion for Copy 54 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs Motion to Withdraw 55 is DENIED. Plaintiffs Motion for Service 57 is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Motion for Continuance 58 is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 11/17/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER Denying without prejudice 54 Motion for Copy. Denying 55 Motion to Withdraw.Granting 57 Motion for Service. Denying 58 Motion for Continuance.SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 2/13/2012. Motions due by 2/13/2012. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 2/18/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 11/14/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)
|
|
Filing
83
ORDER that plaintiff Sean Cottles motion to reargue 79 is DENIED. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 10/25/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
|
|
Filing
78
ORDER that plaintiff's motion for reconsideration 70 is DENIED without prejudice. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/7/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
|
|
Filing
69
ORDER that defendants' motions to dismiss 40 59 are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendants Halasi and O'Donnell are dismissed as defendants in their official capacities, Douglas Gillespie is dismissed in his individual and official capacities, and CCDC is dismissed as a defendant. Defendants' motion to dismiss LVMPD 40 is DENIED. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 7/6/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
|
|
Filing
50
ORDER granting 48 Motion to Extend Deadline. Responses due by 4/4/2011 re 40 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 3/8/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
|
|
Filing
44
ORDER that plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal 25 is DENIED as moot. Plaintiffs motion to stay 37 is hereby DENIED as moot. Plaintiffs motion identifying unserved defendants 38 is hereby GRANTED. The clerk shall issue summ ons to the named defendants in document number 38 and deliver the same with copies of the amended complaint and the December 30, 2010,order 21 to the U.S. Marshal for service. Plaintiff shall have twenty (20) days in which to furnish to the U.S. Ma rshal the required Forms USM-285. Within twenty (20) days after receiving from the U.S. Marshal a copy of the Form USM-285 showing whether service has been accomplished, plaintiff must file a notice with the court identifying which defendants were se rved and which were not served, if any. Pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, service must be accomplished within one-hundred twenty (120) days from the date that the amended complaint was filed. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 2/15/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS, USM 285 forms to plaintiff, summons & amended complaint to USM)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER Denying 15 Motion for Leave and Questions for Clerk; 16 Motion to Reconsider Appointment of Counsel; 18 Motion on Address Change and New Information on Witnesses, Evidence, and John Does; and 20 Motion for Leave. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that clerk shall file amended complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that count 1 of the amended complaint is DISMISSED. Clerk shall issue summons to named defendants. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 12/30/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: USM and Plaintiff - EDS)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER that the clerk of court shall file the complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Kim Holland is DISMISSED from this action. Clerk of Court shall send plaintiff Cottle a civil rights complaint form with instructions. Plaintiff will have 30 days from the date this order is entered to submit his amended complaint. Amended complaint shall be titled as directed in this order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 2 Motion for leave to file 3 legal claims in one complaint is Granted in part. I T IS FURTHER ORDERED that 3 Motion to file longer than usual complaint is Granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 4 Motion to Appoint Counsel is Denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 5 Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 6 Motion for Leave of Court is Denied as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 7 Motion for leave is Denied as moot. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/1/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: plaintiff - 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: Cottle et al v. Gillispie 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.
