MINTZ v. CITY OF HIGH POINT et al
| ROBERT CHARLES MINTZ |
| MIKE SPENCER, RICHARD LAWRENCE, GREGG NANCE, CHRIS THOMPSON, STEVE PENDRY and CITY OF HIGH POINT |
| 1:2011cv00586 |
| July 21, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina |
| NCMD Office |
| Davidson |
| UNASSIGNED |
| WALLACE W. DIXON |
| Employment |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| 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
25
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN JR. on 03/06/2014; that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. 19 ) is GRANTED and that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Doc. 16 ) is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order. (Garland, Leah)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN JR. on 02/01/2013, adopting the Magistrate Judge's recommendation that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), 12(b)(5) and 12(b)(6) (Doc. 6 ) is < b>GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART without prejudice, in that any Title VII claim(s) against the individual Defendants are DISMISSED, but Plaintiff is allowed to amend his Complaint to establish subject matter jurisdiction for any Ti tle VII claim(s) against Defendant City of High Point, as well as to perfect service of process on Defendant City of High Point. FURTHER that this matter be set for a status conference with Magistrate Judge L. Patrick Auld to set further deadlines in this case. (Garland, Leah)
|
|
Filing
11
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 12/31/2012; RECOMMENDING that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12 (b)(1), 12(b)(5) an d 12(b)(6) (Docket Entry 6 ) be granted in part and denied in part without prejudice, in that any Title VII claim(s) against the individual Defendants should be dismissed, but Plaintiff should be allowed to amend his Complaint to establish subject m atter jurisdiction for any Title VII claim(s) against Defendant City of High Point, as well as to perfect service of process on Defendant City of High Point. FURTHER RECOMMENDING that this matter be set for a status conference with the assigned Magistrate Judge to set further deadlines in the case. (Sheets, Jamie)
|
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 Middle 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.
