Colombe v. Rosebud Sioux Tribe et al
| Charles Colombe |
| Rosebud Sioux Tribe, Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court and Judge Sherman Marshall |
| 3:2011cv03002 |
| January 12, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of South Dakota |
| Central Division Office |
| Todd |
| Roberto A. Lange |
| Other Contract |
| 25 U.S.C. ยง 2701 |
| None |
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
66
Opinion and ORDER denying 48 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 58 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by U. S. District Judge Roberto A. Lange on 1/18/13. (SLW)
|
|
Filing
47
OPINION AND ORDER granting 40 Motion to Compel to the extent that Defendants have 21 days from the date of this Opinion and Order to answer the interrogatories and requests for admissions and to respond to the requests for production; denying 44 Motion for Entry of Final Judgment. Signed by U. S. District Judge Roberto A. Lange on 4/19/12. (DJP)
|
|
Filing
43
ORDER denying 34 Motion for Reconsideration ; denying 37 Motion for Permanent Injunction. Signed by U. S. District Judge Roberto A. Lange on 2/2/12. (DJP)
|
|
Filing
33
Opinion and ORDER granting in part and denying in part 5 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by U. S. District Judge Roberto A. Lange on 9/23/11. (SLW)
|
|
Filing
21
OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO DISMISS. Signed by U.S. District Judge Roberto A. Lange on 08/16/2011. (LH)
|
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 South Dakota 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.
