Toliver v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department et al
| George A. Toliver |
| Clark County Detention Center, Doss and Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department |
| 2:2015cv00633 |
| April 7, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Peggy A. Leen |
| Gloria M. Navarro |
| 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
65
ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 52 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 56 Defendant's Counter Motion for Summary Judgement is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 3/19/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 27 Motion for Order of Subpoena as moot. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 09/14/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - NEV)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER Granting 16 Motion for Order of Subpoena. The Clerk of the Court shall reissue summons to Officer Doss. The Clerk of the Court shall issue a subpoena duces tecum to the custodian of records for Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Departmen t directing the custodian of records to provide directly to the USM Officer Doss full name, address, and telephone number. The Clerk of Court shall deliver one copy of the subpoena duces tecum, reissued summons, 10 Complaint, 16 Motion for Order of Subpoena, and this Order to the USM. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 17 Motion for Service by Publication is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 8/19/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF -cc: USM - ADR)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to 9 Order, this action shall proceed on the Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim against Defendant Doss. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall issue a summons for Defendant Dos s, and deliver the same, along with 10 Complaint to the U.S. Marshal for service. The Clerk shall send to Plaintiff one USM-285 form, one copy of the Complaint and copy of this Order. See Order for instructions and dates. IF IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall serve upon Defendant or Defendant's counsel, a copy of every pleading, motion or other document submitted for consideration by the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's 11 Motion to issue Subpoenas is deni ed as moot.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's 12 Application to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 10/27/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PS) - Summons, Complaint and Order hand delivered to U.S. Marshals office.
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER Granting Plaintiff's 6 Motion for Reconsideration. The Clerk of the Court shall reopen this case. The Clerk of the Court shall file the application to proceed in forma pauperis docketed in 2:14-cv-906-RFB-GWF at docket entry 23 in this case. That application to proceed in forma pauperis will be the operative application in this case. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 6/17/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice based on Plaintiff's failure to file another application to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 6/2/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PS)
|
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
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.
