Dalenko v. Stephens et al
| Carol Dalenko |
| Donald W. Stephens, William R. Pittman, Kenneth C. Titus, Barbara A. Jackson, James A. Wynn, Jr., Robert N. Hunter, Jr. and H. Hugh Stevens, Jr |
| 5:2010cv00432 |
| October 8, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Western Division Office |
| WAKE |
| Terrence W. Boyle |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
87
ORDER denying 78 Motion; denying 80 Motion for Extension of Time to Appeal; denying 81 Motion to Reopen Case; granting 82 Motion for Extension of Time to File; denying 83 Motion to Disqualify Judge; granting 84 Motion for Extension of Time. Counsel and plaintiff should read the order in its entirety. Certified copy forwarded to plaintiff via first class mail. Signed by Senior Judge Malcolm J. Howard on 12/1/2011. (Heath, D.)
|
|
Filing
75
ORDER denying 64 Motion to Stay and denying 66 Motion to Vacate. Signed by Senior Judge Malcolm J. Howard on 10/4/2011. Certified copy of order forwarded to pro se plaintiff via first class mail. (Heath, D.)
|
|
Filing
61
JUDGMENT : IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED defendants motions to dismiss are granted and plaintiffs complaint (including purported amendments) is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiff shall have and recover nothing of the defendants and this case is closed. Signed by Senior Judge Malcolm J. Howard on 7/11/11. (Lee, L.)
|
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.
