Arceneaux v. Klein Oak ISD et al
| LaShan Arceneaux |
| Klein Oak ISD, Bret Champion, Brian Greeney, Thomas Hensley, Kimberley Walters, Lance Alexander, Benjie Arnold, Margaret Bollato, Stephen Naetzker and Jennifer Walton |
| 4:2017cv03234 |
| October 24, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Houston Office |
| Harris |
| Lee H Rosenthal |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
159
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Denying 151 Opposed MOTION for Reconsideration of 145 Memorandum and Opinion, Granting 146 MOTION to Sever and Enter Final Judgment. The joint pretrial order deadline and docket call are suspended and will be reset after the Fifth Circuit resolves Arnolds appeal. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(sanderson, 4)
|
|
Filing
145
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION entered: GRANTING in Part and DENYING in Part 123 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Brief, DENYING 117 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment , GRANTING in Part and DENYING in Part 108 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint, GRANTING in Part and DENYING in Part 86 MOTION to Dismiss 77 Amended Complaint/Counterclaim/Crossclaim etc. , GRANTING in Part and DENYING in Part 121 MOTION for Summary Judgme nt , GRANTING in Part and DENYING in Part 127 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Brief, GRANTING in Part and DENYING in Part 83 MOTION to Dismiss 77 Amended Complaint/Counterclaim/Crossclaim etc. , GRANTING 115 Uno pposed MOTION for Leave to File Motion for Summary Judgment in Excess of the Court's Page Limits, 116 MOTION for Summary Judgment , GRANTING 120 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Motion for Summary Judgment in Excess of the Cou rt's Page Limits, DENYING 125 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Brief, 132 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Opposition Memorandum Exceeding the Court's Page Limit, DENYING as MOOT 82 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Request for Injunctive Relief, The joint pretrial order is due May 8 and Docket Call remains set for May 15, 2020. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER entered: Now that M.O., the real party in interest, is an adult, she must decide whether to continue prosecuting this case. If M.O. wants to pursue her claims, she must file an amended complaint by July 12, 2019. A failure to do so will result in dismissal for lack of prosecution. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
|
|
Filing
58
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered: Richard's motion to dismiss, (Docket Entry No. 46), is granted in part and denied in part. The Establishment Clause claim is dismissed, with prejudice and without leave to amend; the free-speech and equal-protection claims may go forward. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
|
|
Filing
49
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered: The motions to dismiss, (Docket Entries No. 39, 40, 46), are granted in part and denied in part. Count 2 (the Establishment Clause claim), count 5 (Arceneaux's equal-protection claim), and count 6 (the due-process claim) are dismissed, with prejudice. Count 1 (the free-speech claim), count 3 (the free-exercise claim), and count 4 (M.O.'s equal-protection claim), may proceed.(Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
|
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 Texas Southern 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.
