Seguin v. Bedrosian et al
Plaintiff: |
Mary Seguin |
Defendant: |
Michael B. Forte, Haiganush R. Bedrosian, John E McCann, III and Stephen J Capineri |
Case Number: |
1:2012cv00614 |
Filed: |
August 31, 2012 |
Court: |
US District Court for the District of Rhode Island |
Office: |
Providence Office |
County: |
Providence |
Presiding Judge: |
Joseph DiClerico |
Presiding Judge: |
Landya B McCafferty |
Nature of Suit: |
Constitutional - State Statute |
Cause of Action: |
42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
Jury Demanded By: |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed |
Document Text |
January 30, 2013 |
Filing
111
ORDER granting 62 Motion to Dismiss; denying 109 Motion to Amend/Correct: defendants motion to dismiss (document #62) is granted. The claims against Hugh T. Clements are also dismissed. All claims are dismissed with prejudice. The plaintiffs motion to amend (document no. 109) is denied. The clerk of court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case.So Ordered by Joseph DiClerico on 1/30/13. (Farrell Pletcher, Paula)
|
January 9, 2013 |
Filing
107
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 97 Motion to Amend/Correctplaintiffs motion for reconsideration document no. 97 is granted in part as follows: to the extent that the December 12, 2012, order document no. 95 granted the defendants mot ion to dismiss document no. 62 , thatpart of the order is vacated. The motion for reconsideration document no. 97 is otherwise denied (this denial includes the plaintiffs challengesto the magistrate judge reference, the approval of the magistrate judges report and recommendation to deny the plaintiffs motionfor a preliminary injunction, her request for leave to fileanother amended complaint, and her request for a preliminaryinjunction). The plaintiff may file a response to the defendants moti onto dismiss document no. 62 the amended complaint 28 on or before January 25, 2013. No further extensions of time will be granted. No further filings are to be made by any party pending the filing of the plaintiffs response. The judgment entered on December 12, 2012, is vacated, pending the courts reconsideration of the defendants motion to dismiss document no. 62 after the plaintiff has filed her response to the motion.. So Ordered by Joseph DiClerico on 1/9/13. (Farrell Pletcher, Paula)
|
December 12, 2012 |
Filing
95
ORDER: Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 5 and motions to vacate the referral order document nos. 35 , 36 , and 60 are denied. The defendants motion to dismiss document no. 62 is granted. All other pending motions are term inated as moot. The clerk of court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Finding as moot 23 Motion ; finding as moot 27 Report and Recommendations.; finding as moot 33 Motion to Strike ; finding as moot 34 Motion for Extens ion of Time to Answer ; finding as moot 40 Motion to Strike ; finding as moot 42 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; finding as moot 44 Motion to Expedite; finding as moot 45 Motion to Amend/Correct; finding as moot 52 Motion for TRO; finding as moot 58 Motion to Strike ; finding as moot 59 Motion to Expedite; finding as moot 61 Motion for Sanctions; finding as moot 66 Motion for Entry of Default; finding as moot 68 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Repl y ; finding as moot 69 Motion to Strike ; finding as moot 73 Motion for Extension of Time ; finding as moot 5 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; finding as moot 85 Motion to Strike ; finding as moot 87 Motion for Sanctions; finding as moot 88 Motion to Disqualify Counsel. ; finding as moot 88 Motion to Expedite; finding as moot 90 Motion to Strike ; finding as moot 92 Motion for Disclosure; finding as moot 93 Motion to Strike ; finding as moot 22 Motion to Expedite. So Ordered by Joseph DiClerico on 12/12/12. (Farrell Pletcher, Paula)
|
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 Rhode Island District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?