Pratt v. Pitt County Department of Social Services et al
| Constance Pratt |
| Pitt County Department of Social Services, Retha Albriton and Sofia Ellis |
| 4:2016cv00198 |
| July 13, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Eastern Division Office |
| PITT |
| W. Earl Britt |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
107
AMENDED JUDGMENT - IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that pursuant to the court's order dated 12/2/2016, Defendant Pitt County Department of Social Services is DISMISSED from the action. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Co urt adopts the Memorandum and Recommendations as its own. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is allowed. This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Susan Edwards, Deputy for Peter A. Moore, Jr., Clerk of Court on 9/24/2018. Copy sent to Constance Pratt, P.O. Box General Mail, Winston-Salem, NC 27102 via US Mail. (Edwards, S.)
|
|
Filing
106
JUDGMENT - IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Court adopts the Memorandum and Recommendations as its own. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is allowed. This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Peter A. Moore, Jr., Clerk of Court on 9/21/2018. (Herrmann, L.)
|
|
Filing
102
ORDER granting in part 101 Motion to Seal 100 PROPOSED SEALED Response. The Clerk is directed to file a redacted version of plaintiff's response in conformity with this order. Signed by Senior Judge W. Earl Britt on 9/7/2018. (Herrmann, L.)
|
|
Filing
97
ORDER denying 93 Motion Requesting the Court to Make a Correction or to Create a Docket Entry of Audio Files. Signed by United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II on 8/6/2018. Copy sent to Constance Pratt PO Box General Mail, Winston-Salem, NC 27102 via US Mail. (Edwards, S.)
|
|
Filing
91
ORDER granting 74 Motion to Seal; granting 88 Motion to Seal; granting 90 Motion to Seal Document 73 PROPOSED SEALED Document, 85 PROPOSED SEALED Response, 89 PROPOSED SEALED Reply, 71 PROPOSED SEALED Memorandum in Support, 87 PROPOSED SEALED Document, 72 PROPOSED SEALED Document, and 86 PROPOSED SEALED Document. Signed by United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II on 6/11/2018. Copy sent to Constance Pratt, PO Box General Mail, Winston-Salem, NC 27102 via US Mail, which is the address as listed in this matter. (Edwards, S.)
|
|
Filing
52
PROTECTIVE ORDER - Signed by U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II on 7/17/2017. Sent to Constance Pratt at PO Box General Mail Winston-Salem, NC 27102 via US Mail. (Briggeman, N.)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER denying 35 Motion to Amend/Request to Add Party; granting 36 Motion to Amend/Request to Add Party. Because the allegations relate to her action against DSS, this motion to amend is granted and Mizelle shall be added as a party to this act ion.; denying 37 Motion to Amend/Request to Add Party; denying 38 Motion for Extension of Time; denying 41 Motion for Issuance of Subpoenas; granting in part and denying in part 42 Motion to Approve Amendment. Signed by United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II on 5/10/2017. Copy sent to Constance Pratt, PO Box General Mail, Winston-Salem, NC 27102 via US Mail. (Edwards, S.)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER regarding 5 Memorandum and Recommendations. Plaintiff's objection to the M&R is SUSTAINED IN PART and OVERRULED IN PART. Signed by Senior Judge W. Earl Britt on 12/2/2016. Order to plaintiff via US Mail at PO Box General Mail, Winston-Salem, NC 27102. (Marsh, K)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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.
