QUINN v. CINTRON et al
| PETER QUINN |
| TAMIKA CINTRON, RUSSELL SHOEMAKER, MICHAEL RAFFERTY and CITY OF PHILADELPHIA |
| 2:2011cv02471 |
| April 11, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Philadelphia Office |
| Philadelphia |
| THOMAS N. ONEILL |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 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
34
ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION IS HEREBY DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE MATTER IS LISTED FOR TRIAL ON 1/6/2014 AT 10:00AM IN COURTROOM 4A BEFORE THE HONORABLE TIMOTHY O'NEILL, JR. MOTIONS IN LIMINE ARE TO BE FILED NO LATER THAN 12/9/2013. PRETRIAL MEMORANDA AND PROPOSED POINTS FOR CHARGE AND VERDICT SHEETS SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 12/9/2013. SIGNED BY HONORABLE THOMAS N. ONEILL, JR ON 10/31/2013. 10/31/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(kp, )
|
|
Filing
31
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 24) IS GRANTED. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS MICHAEL RAFFERTY AND RUSSELL SHOEMAKER AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF PETER QUINN ON COUNTS II AND V OF PLAINTIFFS AMENDED COM PLAINT. MATTER IS LISTED FOR TRIAL TO COMMENCE ON 11/12/13 AT 10:00AM. MOTIONS IN LIMINE DUE 10/28/13. PLAINTIFFS PRETRIAL MEMORANDA DUE 10/28/13. DEFENDANTS PRETRIAL MEMORANDA 10/28/13. SIGNED BY HONORABLE THOMAS N. ONEILL, JR ON 10/3/13. 10/4/13 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(rf, )
|
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 Pennsylvania Eastern 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.
