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

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

13-248 - Zahorik v. Trott et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
13-248 - Zahorik v. Trott et al
April 15, 2014
PDF | More
OPINION AND ORDER granting 42 Motion to Dismiss of the Tennessee Defendants is GRANTED and that all claims asserted against them by Plaintiff, Vincent Zahorik, are DISMISSED. As a result, the Tennessee Defendants alternative Motion to Transfer this case to the Western District of Tennessee is DENIED as moot.(Signed by Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner) Parties notified.(sanderson, 3)
April 15, 2014
PDF | More
OPINION AND ORDER granting 51 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim OF Defendants, Kylen, Pilsner, Gomez, Porretto and City of Galveston (Texas Defendants) and all claims asserted by Zahorik against these Defendants are DISMISSED with prejudice to being reasserted until the Heck conditions are met. Cf. Johnson v. McElveen, 101 F.3d 423, 424 (5th Cir. 1996).(Signed by Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner) Parties notified.(sanderson, 3)
April 15, 2014
PDF | More
FINAL JUDGMENT in favor of all Dfts and against Pltf. ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiff TAKE NOTHING from the Tennessee Defendants, that all claims asserted by Plaintiff against the Tennessee Defendants are DISMISSED for lack of personal jurisdiction and that the Tennessee Defendants RECOVER their costs from Plaintiff. It is further ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiff TAKE NOTHING from the Texas Defendants, that all claims asserted by Plaintiff against the Texas Defendants are DISMISSED with prejudice to being reasserted until the conditions of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), are met and that the Texas Defendants RECOVER their costs from Plaintiff....***Case terminated on 4/15/14(Signed by Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner) Parties notified.(sanderson, 3)
September 9, 2014
PDF | More
ORDER denying as moot 104 Motion to Abstain; denying as moot 104 Motion for Extension of Time; denying 105 Amended Motion for Extension of Time on Notice of Appeal or in the Alternative, Indicate a Ruling on Motion for Relief that is Barred by a Pending Appeal.(Signed by Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner) Parties notified.(sanderson, 3)
November 20, 2015
PDF | More
OPINION AND ORDER denying 113 Motion to Reopen the case against the Tennessee Defendants.(Signed by Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner) Parties notified.(sanderson, 3)
May 5, 2016
PDF | More
OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 51 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; DENIED IN PART as to the Heck bar and GRANTED IN PART as set forth above; and that the following claims are DISMISSED: (a) Plaintiffs claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act; (b) Plaintiffs claims under§1985 and §1986; (c) Plaintiffs §1983 claims against the individually-named Defendants (Kylen, Pilsner, Gomez and Porretto) in their official capacity; (d) Plaintiffs First and Fourth Amendment claims brought under §1983; (e) Plaintiffs municipal liability claim against the Defendant City; and (f) all Plaintiffs state law claims. It is the further ORDER of this Court that Defendants provide additional briefing within fourteen days (14) of the date this Order is entered addressing Plaintiffs substantive due process and malicious prosecution claims. After Defendants file their additional briefing, Plaintiff will then have ten (10) days after its filing to respond; and, a reply by Defendants, if any, is then due five (5) days after Plaintiffs response, if any, is filed with the clerk. (Signed by Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner) Parties notified.(sanderson, 3)
June 27, 2016
PDF | More
OPINION AND ORDER granting 134 SUPPLEMENT to Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim regarding Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claims and that Plaintiff Vincent Zahorik's action is DISMISSED(Signed by Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner) Parties notified.(sanderson, 3)