Lee v. City of Fayetteville, et al
Plaintiff: Gregory Maurice Lee
Defendant: City of Fayetteville, Harold Medlock and JOHN DOES
Case Number: 5:2015cv00638
Filed: December 7, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina
Office: Western Division Office
County: CUMBERLAND
Presiding Judge: Louise Wood Flanagan
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 4, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 38 JUDGMENT - IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED in accordance with the court's orders entered March 30, 2016 and August 4, 2016, and for the reasons set forth more specifically therein, that this case is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Julie Richards Johnston, Clerk of Court on 8/4/2016. (Baker, C.)
March 30, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 21 First MOTION to Dismiss, First MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction: (1) Plaintiff's claims against defendant Medlock and the John Doe defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED as duplicative of plaintiff's claims against defendant Fayetteville; (2) Plaintiff is DIRECTED to effect service properly on defendant Fayetteville within 90 days of the date of this order; (3) Plaintiff's punitive damages claim against d efendant Fayetteville is DISMISSED; (4) Plaintiff is DIRECTED to effect service properly on defendant Medlock, in his individual capacity, within 90 days of the date of this order; and (5) Plaintiff's claims against the John Doe defendants in th eir official capacities are DISMISSED pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). The court DENIES plaintiff's request for a hearing, as the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in brief and oral argument would not aid significantly in the decisional process. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 3/30/2016. (Tripp, S.)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 North Carolina Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lee v. City of Fayetteville, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of Fayetteville
Represented By: Quintin D. Byrd
Represented By: R. Jonathan Charleston
Represented By: Jose A. Coker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Harold Medlock
Represented By: Quintin D. Byrd
Represented By: R. Jonathan Charleston
Represented By: Jose A. Coker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: JOHN DOES
Represented By: Quintin D. Byrd
Represented By: R. Jonathan Charleston
Represented By: Jose A. Coker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Gregory Maurice Lee
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.


Why Is My Information Online?