Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

14-095 - COMER v. SCHNEDIER et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
14-095 - COMER v. SCHNEDIER et al
August 25, 2014
PDF | More
ENTRY Discussing Complaint, Dismissing Certain Claims, and Directing Further Proceedings - 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. Attorney Gary W. Sorge is DISMISSED. Claims against Det. Nicholas Beetz and Sgt. Kendle Davis are DISMISSED. Any claim for relief based on the theory that a defendant committed perjury is DISMISSED. This action shall proceed as to the Fourth Amendment claims alleged against Det. David Schnedier. Specifically, Comer's claim that Det. Schnedier subjected him to false arrest and confinement and conducted an illegal search and seizure shall proceed as submitted. The clerk is designated, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3), to issue and serve process on the defendants in the manner specified by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(1). Process shall consist of the complaint, applicable forms and this Entry. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/25/2014 (copy mailed to plaintiff). (LBT)
January 11, 2016
PDF | More
igned by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 1/11/2016 (copy mailed to plaintiff). (LBT)ENTRY Discussing Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment - 14 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. The undisputed record reflects that Detective Schneider did not violate Mr. Comer's Fourth Amendment rights. See Entry for details. S
February 8, 2016
PDF | More
ENTRY Discussing Post Judgment Motion - The plaintiff's motion does not demonstrate a manifest error of law or present newly discovered evidence. Nor does the motion provide an explanation for his delay in responding to the defendant's motion for summary judgment. In addition, there is no indication what arguments or evidence the plaintiff would like to present which could change the outcome of this case. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff's post judgment motion Dkt. 21 is DENIED. See Entry for details. Copy sent to plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 2/8/2016. (MAG)