Kent v. Gantt
Plaintiff: Bernadine Kennedy Kent
Defendant: Joshua Gantt
Case Number: 2:2013cv00459
Filed: May 13, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Columbus Office
County: FRANKLIN
Presiding Judge: Terence P Kemp
Presiding Judge: Algenon L. Marbley
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
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
September 26, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 15 OPINION AND ORDER granting 4 Motion to Dismiss & denying 7 Motion for Sanctions. Claims One, Two and Three of the complaint are dismissed w/prejudice. The remaining claims are dismissed w/out prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Terence P Kemp on 9/26/2013. (kk2)
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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kent v. Gantt
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Bernadine Kennedy Kent
Represented By: Robert J Fitrakis
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: Joshua Gantt
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?