Richmond v. Harrison et al
Plaintiff: Zachery Richmond
Defendant: Rick Harrison, Vaun Ryan, Ryan Snow and Roosevelt City
Case Number: 2:2017cv00880
Filed: August 2, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of Utah
Office: Central Office
County: Duchesne
Presiding Judge: David Nuffer
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 28 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part 20 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint: The Motion is GRANTED as to the claims against Defendant Harrison and Defendant Roosevelt City. The Motion is DENIED as to the claims against Defendant Snow, which are dismissed without prejudice. Because this memorandum decision and order addresses the sufficiency of the allegations against Defendant Harrison, the pending 16 Motion to Dismiss t hat was filed prior to the Motion to Amend is MOOT. Because Vaun Ryan and Ryan Snow are no longer parties to the present action, their pending 15 Motion to Quash is also MOOT. Plaintiff is ORDERED to serve a copy of the First Amended Complaint, ref lecting the determinations of this memorandum decision and order, on the applicable parties within 14 days after the entry of this order. As to Roosevelt City, the service of the First Amended Complaint must be accompanied by the appropriate summons, served in a manner conforming with Rule Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(j)(2). This specific directive is issued under the authority regarding the time limit for service provided under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Because any defect in the service as to Roosevelt City will be cured, Roosevelt City's pending 15 Motion to Quash is also MOOT. Defendants are to respond to the First Amended Complaint with 14 days after service. Signed by Judge David Nuffer on 9/27/18. (dla)
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 Utah District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Richmond v. Harrison et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Zachery Richmond
Represented By: Jeffrey Christian Jensen
Represented By: Nathaniel N. Nelson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Rick Harrison
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Vaun Ryan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Ryan Snow
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Roosevelt City
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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?