Hart v. Hillsdale County, 16-cv-10253. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20180417b02
Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 16, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 16, 2018
Summary: ORDER STAYING CASE AND ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE DENISE PAGE HOOD , Chief District Judge . Defendants in this matter filed Notices of Appeal from the Court's Order denying motions to dismiss and/or summary judgment. (Doc. Nos. 123, 125) "A denial of summary judgment is generally not a final judgment." Haynes v. City of Circleville, Ohio, 474 F.3d 357 , 361 (6th Cir. 2007)(quoting Hoover v. Radabaugh, 307 F.3d 460 , 465 (6th Cir. 2002)). A denial of a motion for summary judgment o
Summary: ORDER STAYING CASE AND ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE DENISE PAGE HOOD , Chief District Judge . Defendants in this matter filed Notices of Appeal from the Court's Order denying motions to dismiss and/or summary judgment. (Doc. Nos. 123, 125) "A denial of summary judgment is generally not a final judgment." Haynes v. City of Circleville, Ohio, 474 F.3d 357 , 361 (6th Cir. 2007)(quoting Hoover v. Radabaugh, 307 F.3d 460 , 465 (6th Cir. 2002)). A denial of a motion for summary judgment on..
More
ORDER STAYING CASE AND ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE
DENISE PAGE HOOD, Chief District Judge.
Defendants in this matter filed Notices of Appeal from the Court's Order denying motions to dismiss and/or summary judgment. (Doc. Nos. 123, 125) "A denial of summary judgment is generally not a final judgment." Haynes v. City of Circleville, Ohio, 474 F.3d 357, 361 (6th Cir. 2007)(quoting Hoover v. Radabaugh, 307 F.3d 460, 465 (6th Cir. 2002)). A denial of a motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity may be appealed as a collateral order where (1) the defendant is a public official asserting the defense of qualified immunity and (2) the issue appealed concerns not which facts the parties might be able to prove, but whether certain alleged facts reflect a violation of clearly established law. Haynes, 474 F.3d at 361. The Court will stay the matter until the resolution of the appeals. See Mithcell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that this action is STAYED and ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED. The action may be reopened after a party provides the Court with notice that a mandate has been issued from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Source: Leagle
