Shank v. Johnson et al
| Donald Shank |
| Jeh Charles Johnson, Kurt A. Jordan and Mark Haught |
| 3:2015cv00587 |
| December 4, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| Charlotte Office |
| Mecklenburg |
| David Keesler |
| Frank D. Whitney |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
39
ORDER granting 38 Joint Motion To Stay And Notice Of Settlement. The parties shall file a Stipulation of Dismissal on or before July 26, 2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 5/23/18. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(mga)
|
|
Filing
30
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 20 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs claims against Defendants Mark Haught and Kurt Jordan are DISMISSED. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 9/13/2017. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER denying as moot 25 Motion Requesting Consent To Redeliver To The Clerk Of Court, The Original Unopened Hardcopy Courier Package Containing The Plaintiff's Response To The Defendants' Motion To Dismiss Or For Summary Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 1/31/17. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(mga)
|
|
Filing
16
CONSENT ORDER TO PLACE THE 1 COMPLAINT UNDER SEAL AND REQUIRE THE PLAINTIFF TO FILE A REDACTED VERSION THEREOF. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 3/16/16. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(mga)
|
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.
