O'Connor et al v. County of Clackamas, Oregon et al
| Big Mountain Co., Lisa Konell and Kip O'Connor |
| Donna Bellows, Roy Bellows, Kimberly Benthin, Janine Bertram, County of Clackamas, Oregon, Carl Cox, Dave Fulton, Steve Hanschka, Gary Hewitt, Michael McAllister, Don Mench and Mt. Hood Corridor Community Planning Organization |
| 3:2011cv01297 |
| October 27, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Portland Office |
| Michael H. Simon |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
199
Opinion and Order - The CPO Defendants' Motion for Attorney's Fees (Dkt. 166 ) is GRANTED IN PART. The CPO Defendants are awarded $77,352.50 against Plaintiffs as reasonable attorneys fees. Signed on 5/31/2016 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)
|
|
Filing
144
Opinion and Order - The Clackamas County Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 87 is GRANTED. Defendant Mench's Motion for Summary Judgment 91 is GRANTED. This case is dismissed with prejudice. Signed on 7/22/2013 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)
|
|
Filing
82
Opinion and Order - The County Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 70 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The claims asserted by Plaintiff O'Connor are dismissed with leave to replead within fourteen (14) days. Plaintiffs are furth er directed to file within fourteen (14) days a Second Amended Complaint that specifically names in the caption all Plaintiffs and Defendants remaining in this action. In addition, with regard to Plaintiffs' First Claim for Relief, under 42 U.S. C. § 1983, Plaintiffs are directed to plead their claims for procedural and substance due process in separate claims. In addition, Plaintiffs are directed to indicate that their claims against Defendants Benthin and Hanschka are brought against those Defendants only in their personal capacities. Further, if Plaintiffs intend to ask for punitive damages, they must specify against which Defendants such punitive damages are sought. Finally, as discussed during oral argument, all discovery in t his case shall close by February 28, 2013, dispositive motions may be filed not later than March 29, 2013, and all parties are allowed an additional ten (10) interrogatories beyond the limitations set forth in Rule 33(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed on 12/17/12 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)
|
|
Filing
66
Opinion and Order - Defendants' motions to dismiss (Docs. 13 and 17 ) are granted in part and denied in part as follows: (a) Plaintiffs' tort claim for intentional interference against individual County Defendants Hanschka and Benthin is dismissed with prejudice; (b) Plaintiffs' tort claim for intentional interference against the County is dismissed without prejudice; (c) Plaintiffs' tort claim for intentional interference against the CPO Defendants is dismissed without pr ejudice; (d) Plaintiff O'Connor's claims are dismissed without prejudice; (e) Plaintiffs' class-of-one claim under § 1983 is dismissed without prejudice; (f) Plaintiffs' claims under § 1983 against the individual board m embers of MHC-CPO are dismissed without prejudice (but Plaintiffs claims under § 1983 against MHC-CPO itself and its Chairman, Defendant Mench, are not dismissed); and (g) all other pleading motions and arguments not expressly ruled upon in this paragraph are denied. Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint within 30 days from the date of this Opinion and Order. Signed on 8/28/12 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)
|
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 Oregon 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.
