Halter v. Walker et al, No. 7:2011cv00269 - Document 9 (W.D. Va. 2011)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Jackson L. Kiser on 09/12/2011. (kab)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
ckE- s OF CEU.S.Dl GOtr FI sm J AT I NVI E, M LL VA IED I THE UNI N TED STATES DI STRI COURT CT FO R TH E W EST ERN DI STRI T O F V I G I I C R N A R O A NO K E DIV ISIO N D AN I N O R BER T H A LTER , EL Pl ntf, ai if JU BK S L Af i l , . D E Ci lAc i N o.7: c 00269 vi ton 11- vM EM OR ANDUM O PI ON NI SG T.P.W A LK ER ,e al, t . Dee f ndant . s By: Hon.Jacks L. ie on K s r Se or U ni e St e Di t i tJudge ni t d at s s r c By Or e e e J 1 20l t c ta s s d a $350. tlngf a gr nt d der nt r d une 3, 1, he our s es e 00 ii ee nd a e s s es pl ntf ffee da fom t da eoft Or rt f wa d t t cour asa e ai if it n ys r he t he de o or r o he t t t mentofhi a s t . a a r por r r ng hi tus a oun f t sx m ont pr ort J 2011 s gne by ea h nd e t ega di s r t cc t or he i hs i o une ,i d c a opr a e prs of i alw he e pl ntf w asco i d durng t ttm e s t co tc d ppr i t i on fci r ai if nfne i ha i o he ur oul de e mi apaym e s he e Pli ifwasa s d t tf iur t r t r t r quie t r ne nt c dul . a ntf dvi e ha al e o e u n he e r d pa r k woul r s ti dimis loft sa i wihoutprj ce pe wor d e ul n s sa hi cton t eudi . Pl ntf fl d hi Com pl i i J 201l Pl i t f f l d w ih hi Com pl i alI a e ai i f ie s a nt n une . a n if ie t s a nt l nm t Ac untRe t ha r po td t sx mont pe i be or J y 2011 Thec ts ntpl i ifa co por t t e re he i h rod f e ul . our e antf ne I a e A cc w nm t ountRe tf m r quesi i or a i f t s x- ont pe i pr e ng por or e tng nf m ton or he i m h r od ec di J 2011 butpl ntf tl d a c oft pror i de t l a eAc ountRepor de c i ng une , ai if ie opy he i ,na qua e nm t c t s rbi t s x- ont pe i be or J y 2011. Ther f e, a n ifdi notcom pl w ih t c tonal he i m h r od f e ul e or pl i t f d y t he ondii fl go d r d s t tewanngt a hsa o ma b d s se wi o tp eu ief r ii r e , e pi h r i h t i din y e imis d t u rj dc o n e h nonc plance a t co tca om i , nd he ur nnotde e m i t a o i t flng f as es m e ,plr uan t t r ne he ppr pr a e ii ee s s nt z s t o 28U. C. 1 5 a .Ac o dngy t sa to mu t eds se wih u p eu ief rp anifs S. j 91 () c r i l,hi cin s b imis d t o t rj d c o litf f iur t pa t flng f orpr ry docume hi a ia i t pr ee j f m apaupe i a l e o y he ii ee ope l nt s pplc ton o oc d . or n rs aft t cour ' or er he ts der. Pl ntf m ay refl hi cl m si a new and s at acton att tm e he ai i f ie s ai n epar e i he i c npayt $350flngfeorfl t ne sar doc nt t pr edjlf mapa rs a he ii e ie he ce s y ume s o oce . or ! upei. RK
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
