Taylor v. City of Bixby

Taylor v. City of Bixby

Plaintiff:	Geron R Taylor
Defendant:	City of Bixby
Case Number:	4:2012cv00066
Filed:	February 14, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
Office:	Tulsa Office
County:	Tulsa
Presiding Judge:	Terence Kern
Presiding Judge:	Frank H McCarthy
Nature of Suit:	Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 2000
Jury Demanded By:	Both

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
December 10, 2012	Filing 44 OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan that defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 18) is granted in part as to plaintiff's claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 1983 for violations of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment s. However, plaintiff's claims, pursuant to either 42 U.S.C. 1981 or 1983, for violations of the Sixth Amendment and for retaliatory charge are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Heck. The Court Clerk is directed to remand plaintiff' s state law claims to the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. All other pending motions are deemed moot. The pretrial conference set for December 13, 2012 and the trial set for December 17, 2012 are stricken. ; striking/terminating deadli ne(s)/Hearing(s); finding as moot 40 Motion to Accelerate/Extend/Reset Hearing(s)/Deadline(s); finding as moot 41 Motion to Disqualify; finding as moot 16 Motion in Limine; finding as moot 17 Motion in Limine; granting in part and finding as moot in part 18 Motion for Summary Judgment (Re: 2 Notice of Removal ) (RGG, Chambers)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 10, 2012

Filing 44 OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan that defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 18) is granted in part as to plaintiff's claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 1983 for violations of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment s. However, plaintiff's claims, pursuant to either 42 U.S.C. 1981 or 1983, for violations of the Sixth Amendment and for retaliatory charge are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Heck. The Court Clerk is directed to remand plaintiff' s state law claims to the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. All other pending motions are deemed moot. The pretrial conference set for December 13, 2012 and the trial set for December 17, 2012 are stricken. ; striking/terminating deadli ne(s)/Hearing(s); finding as moot 40 Motion to Accelerate/Extend/Reset Hearing(s)/Deadline(s); finding as moot 41 Motion to Disqualify; finding as moot 16 Motion in Limine; finding as moot 17 Motion in Limine; granting in part and finding as moot in part 18 Motion for Summary Judgment (Re: 2 Notice of Removal ) (RGG, Chambers)

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 Oklahoma Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Taylor v. City of Bixby
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Geron R Taylor
Represented By:	George Michael Miles
Represented By:	Steven R Hickman
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: City of Bixby
Represented By:	Thomas Adrian LeBlanc
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?