Legal Opinion
Dier v. CITY OF PRESTONSBURG, KY.
District Court, E.D. Kentucky
Decided March 30, 2007No. CIV. 04-418-GFVTPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
VAN TATENHOVE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Defendants. [R. 48]. The Plaintiff filed a Response [R. 57] in objection and the Defendants filed a timely Reply [R. 58] in support of their original Motion. The matter is now ripe for review. For the reasons set forth below, and in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, the Motion for Summary Judgment will be granted.
I
BACKGROUND
This action arises from several civil rights claims asserted by the pro se Plaintiff, Michael Dier (“Dier”). Dier claims that the City of Prestonsburg,…
2Cases cited17 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
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Woosley v. City of ParisDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2008