The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Inc. et al v. Duplin County, North Carolina et al
Case Number: 7:1988cv00005
Filed: February 2, 1988
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina
Office: Southern Division Office
Presiding Judge: Louise Wood Flanagan
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Voting
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
February 21, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 67 JUDGMENT - IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED in accordance with the court's oral order entered February 15, 2012, and for the reasons set forth more specifically at hearing on that date, that the intervener-defendants' motion to terminate or modify the consent decree is DENIED and the plaintiff's motion to enforce the consent decree is GRANTED. Signed by Dennis P. Iavarone, Clerk of Court on 02/21/2012. (Baker, C.)
February 2, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 58 ORDER granting 25 Motion to Intervene - The parties shall continue to comply with the briefing schedule for the motion to enforce consent decree as set forth in the scheduling order at docket entry 34 . Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 02/02/2012. (Baker, C.)
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: The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Inc. et al v. Duplin County, North Carolina et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?