Legal Opinion
Hormann v. City of Zanesville
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided September 24, 2020No. 2:19-cv-01329Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION DAMEN J. HORMANN, Plaintiff, : Case No. 2:19-cv-1329 v. Judge Sarah D. Morrison Chief Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers CITY OF ZANESVILLE, et al. : Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court for consideration of a Motion for Summary Judgment, purportedly filed by “all Defendants.” (ECF No. 31.) After Plaintiff Damen Hormann failed to timely respond to Defendants’ Motion, the Court ordered Mr. Hormann to file any response within seven days thereafter, and show cause why his untimely filing…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.