Margeson v. White County, Tennessee et al
| Brenda Margeson |
| Jane Does I-VII, Joseph Williams, Chris Isom, Kenneth Simmons, Robert Pike, Daniel Trivett, Nicholas Dunn, William Whitson, John Does I-VII, White County, Tennessee, Oddie Shoupe, Thomas Simmons, Craig Capps and Richard Lynch |
| 2:2012cv00052 |
| June 22, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Cookeville Office |
| White |
| Kevin H. Sharp |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Both |
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
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 12/18/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(afs)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER: Within 20 days of the date of entry of this Order, the parties shall file further briefing on the accuracy of the statement, the need for (and propriety of) the number of shots fired, and the factual circumstances surrounding exactly what h appened once Mr. Margeson got up from the couch and allegedly pointed a rifle at Deputy Capps. Said briefing shall include appropriate citation to the record, and supporting legal authority. Response briefs shall be filed within 10 days of the initial briefs. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 10/30/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
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 Tennessee Middle 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.
