JACOBS v. BEARD, et al

JACOBS v. BEARD, et al

Case Number:	2:2004cv01366
Filed:	September 9, 2004
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Pittsburgh Office
Presiding Judge:	Joy Flowers Conti
Presiding Judge:	Robert C. Mitchell
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner Civil Rights (Prison Condition)
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

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
June 7, 2011	Filing 231 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. As set forth in the Memorandum Opinion and Order herein: re 219 MOTION for Pre and Post Judgment Loss filed by ANDRE JACOBS; re 220 MOTION to Alter Judgment, MOTION to Amend/Correct 194 Judgment, pursuant to Feder al Rules 52 and 59. Terminate Civil Case, filed by ANDRE JACOBS; and re 221 MOTION for New Trial on Issues not presented to the Jury, filed by ANDRE JACOBS. As set forth in the Memorandum Opinion and Order herein, re 219 Motion for Judgment is DENIED without prejudice; re 220 Motion to Alter Judgment is DENIED with prejudice; re 221 Motion for New Trial is DENIED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Joy Flowers Conti on 06/07/2011. (lbk)
September 21, 2009	Filing 189 MEMORANDUM OPINION re 136 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law filed by THOMAS MCCONNELL, KRISTIN P. RESSING, JEFFREY BEARD, ALLEN LYNCH, WILLIAM STICKMAN, FRANK CHERICO, CAPTAIN J. SIMPSON, DAVID MCCOY, MICHAEL FERSON, GREGORY GIDDENS, ROBERT B ITTNER, CAROL SCIRE, SHELLY MANKEY. For the reasons set forth in the opinion, defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law is denied with respect to the defamation claim against Giddens, denied with respect to the retaliation claims against McConnell and Scire, granted with respect to the conspiracy claims against Scire and McConnell, and granted with respect to the access to courts claim against Scire, McConnell and Giddens. Signed by Judge Joy Flowers Conti on 9/21/2009. (bjk)

Date Filed

Document Text

June 7, 2011

Filing 231 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. As set forth in the Memorandum Opinion and Order herein: re 219 MOTION for Pre and Post Judgment Loss filed by ANDRE JACOBS; re 220 MOTION to Alter Judgment, MOTION to Amend/Correct 194 Judgment, pursuant to Feder al Rules 52 and 59. Terminate Civil Case, filed by ANDRE JACOBS; and re 221 MOTION for New Trial on Issues not presented to the Jury, filed by ANDRE JACOBS. As set forth in the Memorandum Opinion and Order herein, re 219 Motion for Judgment is DENIED without prejudice; re 220 Motion to Alter Judgment is DENIED with prejudice; re 221 Motion for New Trial is DENIED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Joy Flowers Conti on 06/07/2011. (lbk)

September 21, 2009

Filing 189 MEMORANDUM OPINION re 136 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law filed by THOMAS MCCONNELL, KRISTIN P. RESSING, JEFFREY BEARD, ALLEN LYNCH, WILLIAM STICKMAN, FRANK CHERICO, CAPTAIN J. SIMPSON, DAVID MCCOY, MICHAEL FERSON, GREGORY GIDDENS, ROBERT B ITTNER, CAROL SCIRE, SHELLY MANKEY. For the reasons set forth in the opinion, defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law is denied with respect to the defamation claim against Giddens, denied with respect to the retaliation claims against McConnell and Scire, granted with respect to the conspiracy claims against Scire and McConnell, and granted with respect to the access to courts claim against Scire, McConnell and Giddens. Signed by Judge Joy Flowers Conti on 9/21/2009. (bjk)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: JACOBS v. BEARD, 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?