Welch v. City of Albuquerque et al
| Terysa M. Welch |
| City of Albuquerque, Raymond Schultz, Elizabeth Paiz, William Roseman, Joseph Hudson, David Hubbard, Robert Smith, Cecil Knox, J. R. Potter, Kevin Gagne, Sue Neal and John Does |
| 1:2011cv00700 |
| August 10, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of New Mexico |
| Albuquerque Office |
| Sandoval |
| Karen B. Molzen |
| Robert Hayes Scott |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Both |
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
463
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granting 462 Joint Motion to Dismiss All Remaining Claims With Prejudice. (tah)
|
|
Filing
451
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales setting a telephonic status conference for 7/12/2018 at 10:00 AM in Las Cruces - Telephonic Hearing/Conference before District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales. (tah)
|
|
Filing
441
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales denying as moot 352 Defendants' Motion in Limine and Memorandum of Law to Exclude All References to Any Defendant's General Reputation or Reputation for Any Particular Trait of Character. (tah)
|
|
Filing
439
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales regarding Defendants' oral Rule 50 motion and denying 436 Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration. (tah)
|
|
Filing
422
PRETRIAL ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales. (tah)
|
|
Filing
412
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales setting a telephonic status conference for 5/10/2018 at 10:00 AM in Las Cruces - Telephonic Hearing/Conference before District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales. REMINDER: Judge Gonzales' Meet-Me Line can only accommodate up to five (5) telephone lines, including the Courts; if the parties anticipate that they will exceed this capacity, they must contact the Court immediately so that alternative arrangements may be made. (tah)
|
|
Filing
405
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBITS 94 AND 95 by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales. (tah)
|
|
Filing
374
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granting 373 Joint Motion to Dismiss Count IV Against David Hubbard with Prejudice. Defendant David Hubbard terminated. (tah)
|
|
Filing
344
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granting 317 Plaintiff's Opposed Request to Hold Trial in Albuquerque. (tah)
|
|
Filing
342
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales setting a telephonic status conference for 3/26/2018 at 01:30 PM in Las Cruces - Telephonic Hearing/Conference before District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales. (tah)
|
|
Filing
339
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granting 338 Unopposed Motion to Withdraw. Attorney Esteban A. Aguilar, Sr. and Esteban Angel Aguilar, Jr. terminated. (tah)
|
|
Filing
333
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales setting a telephonic status conference for 1/11/2018 at 01:30 PM in Las Cruces - Telephonic Hearing/Conference before District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales. (tah)
|
|
Filing
320
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales granting 317 Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial. The request to hold the trial in Albuquerque is taken under advisement. (tah)
|
|
Filing
294
STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales. (tah)
|
|
Filing
269
ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales denying without prejudice 230 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Portions of Counts I, III, and IV and Memorandum in Support Thereof. Amended motion for partial summary judgment due 5/2/2017. (tah)
|
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 New Mexico 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.
