Hood v. City of Columbus et al
Adrienne Hood |
City of Columbus, Jason S. Bare, Zachary B. Rosen, Eric J. Pilya, Gary Cameron and Kim Jacobs |
2:2017cv00471 |
June 1, 2017 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
Columbus Office |
FRANKLIN |
Elizabeth Preston Deavers |
George C. Smith |
Other Civil Rights |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 394 ORDER denying 389 Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions. Signed by Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 4/18/2022. (cmw) |
Filing 390 OPINION AND ORDER granting 387 Defendants Motion for Leave to File Flash Drive; granting 356 Defendants Motion for Leave for Jury View of GMC Acadia; granting in part and denying in part 360 Defendants Supplemental Motion in Limine; denying [3 65] Plaintiffs Supplemental Motion in Limine; denying as moot 368 Motion for Order to; finding as moot 368 Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Entry ; granting 371 Plaintiffs Motion to Withdraw Order to Entry; granting 375 Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File an Amended Response in Opposition; granting 382 Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Exhibits. Signed by Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 4/14/2022. (cmw) |
Filing 386 ORDER denying 380 Plaintiffs Motion for Entry of Certified Order. Jury Trial RESET for 4/18/2022 at 09:00 AM before Judge Edmund A. Sargus. Signed by Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 4/4/2022. (cmw) |
Filing 322 ORDER granting in part and denying in part and holding in abeyance in part 299 Plaintiff's Motion in Limine.. Signed by Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 10/28/2021. (cmw) |
Filing 284 OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 269 DEFENDANTS RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION IN LIMINE.. Signed by Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 6/7/2021. (cmw) |
Filing 85 ORDER, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: It is RECOMMENDED (1) that non-party Shantel Anderson be held in civil contempt; (2) that Ms. Anderson be compelled to make herself available for deposition; and (3) that Ms. Anderson be ordered to reimburse Defendan ts in the amount of $618.84 for the expenses incurred due to her failure to attend duly noticed depositions in January and March 2018. Objections to R&R due by 5/9/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on April 25, 2018. (jlk) (jlk) Modified on 4/25/2018 (jlk). |
Filing 72 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND CERTIFICATION OF FACTS: It is RECOMMENDED (1) that non-party Ericka Hickman be held in civil contempt; (2) that Ms. Hickman be either compelled to make herself available for deposition or barred from providing an y testimony during any motion, hearing, or trial in this matter; and (3) that Ms. Hickman be ordered to reimburse Defendants in the amount of $1,162.33 for the expenses incurred due to her failure to attend duly noticed depositions in November 2017 and February 2018 re 54 Motion for Contempt Ericka Hickman. Objections to R&R due by 5/1/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on April 17, 2018. (jlk) |
Filing 46 ORDER granting 41 , 42 , 43 Motions to Enforce Deposition Subpoenas. Jackson is ORDERED TO APPEAR at the Columbus City Attorneys Office on MARCH 12, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. to testify at a deposition. Torres is ORDERED TO APPEAR at the Columbus City Attorneys Office on MARCH 12, 2018, at 1:00 p.m. to testify at a deposition. Anderson is ORDERED TO APPEAR at the Columbus City Attorneys Office on MARCH 26, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. to testify at a deposition. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on January 19, 2018. (jlk) |
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 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.