Legal Opinion
Roemen v. United States
District Court, D. South Dakota
Decided October 2, 2024No. 4:19-cv-04006Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION MICAH ROEMEN, and TOM TEN EYCK, 4:19-CV-4006-LLP Guardian of Morgan Ten Eyck; and MICHELLE TEN EYCK, Guardian of Morgan Ten Eyck, MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ROBERT NEUEMNFELDT, individually and UNKNOWN SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL OF THE UNITED STATES, individually, Defendants. Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Third Motion to Amend Complaint. (Doc. 264). For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion is granted. BACKGROUND A. Administrative Complaint The…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Donna Reilly, Etc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- Richard Allgeier, Maria D. Boldrick, Intervening v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Gilbane Building Co. v. Federal Reserve Bank of RichmondCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1996
- Rita Lynn Baker v. John Morrell & Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2004
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.