Mitchell et al v. Luckenbill et al
Case Number: 3:2004cv02240
Filed: October 12, 2004
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Office: Scranton Office
Presiding Judge: Thomas I. Vanaskie
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS 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
August 24, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 172 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - AND NOW, this 24th day of August, 2010, in accordance w/the accompanying memorandum, it is Ordered that: 1. Plf.'s mtn. in limine to preclude admission of, or reference, to a State Police internal investigation into the 10 /13/02 incident 138 is DENIED as moot as a result of the stip. entered into between plfs. & defts. 161 . 2. Plf.'s mtn. in limine to preclude admission of, or reference to, Steve Mitchell's criminal record 140 is DENIED w/respect to an y felony convictions that occurred w/in the past 10 years. The mtn. is GRANTED insofar as it seeks to preclude the introduction of evidence of misdemeanor offenses or convictions occurring more than 10 years ago for purposes of impeachment under Rule 609. To the extent defts. intend to introduce evidence of past convictions for purposes other than impeachment under Rule 609, the crt. does not find that such potential evidentiary use of the convictions is addressed by plfs.' mtn., and the cr t. will therefore consider the admissibility of such evidence at the time of trial. 3. Defts.' mtn. in limine to exclude evidence of injuries to Robin Mitchell or Strom Hasenauer, & evidence regarding the use of force against Storm Hasenauer 146 is DENIED. (See memo for complete details.) Signed by Honorable William W. Caldwell on 8/24/10. (am)
August 19, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 171 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - AND NOW, this 19th day of August, 2010, upon con. of the R&R of Mag. Judge Carlson, it is Ordered as follows: 1. Plfs.' mtn. to remand 165 is granted. 2. All further proceedings will be conducted by the undersigned. 169 Signed by Honorable William W. Caldwell on 8/19/10. (am)
August 17, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 169 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - IT IS RECOMMENDED as follows; First, it is recommended that the motion to remand be GRANTED. (Doc. 165.) Second, recognizing that this remand may place additional burdens upon the district court, and further recognizing th at there are pending motions in limine in this case, (Docs. 138, 140, 146) it is further recommended that the pending motions inlimine be referred to the undersigned for prompt preparation of a report and recommendation addressing all of these pending motions. Objections to R&R due by 9/3/2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson on August 17, 2010. (kjn )
January 5, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 125 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 1. Defendants Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 82; Dkt. 83) are GRANTED IN PART. The Fourth Amendment illegal entry claim, Mr. Mitchells Fourth Amendment excessive force claim, and Bria Hasenauers excessive force claim survive Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs remaining claims are DISMISSED. 2. A Telephone Scheduling Conference will be held on Tuesday, February 9, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. Plaintiffs counsel is responsible for placing the call to (570) 207-5720, and all parties should be ready to proceed before the undersigned is contacted. Signed by Honorable Thomas I. Vanaskie on 1/5/10. (jfg)
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 Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Mitchell et al v. Luckenbill et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?