Zitterkopf et al v. Hanks et al
ORDER regarding MOTION for Summary Judgment 92 that plaintiffs are granted leave to file a sur-reply brief that addresses the merits of the Nebraska Defendants sovereign immunity argument. The sur-reply brief shall be filed on or before June 7, 2010. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (ADB, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA BRANDON ZITTERKOPF, individually and on behalf of his minor son, IZIAH ZITTERKOPF, HENRY ZITTERKOPF, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LISA ZITTERKOPF, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) LANNY HANKS, in his official ) and individual capacities, ) BRYAN MOREHOUSE, in his ) official and individual ) capacities, and MARK BLISS in ) his official and individual ) capacities, ) ) Defendants. ) ______________________________)
This matter is before the Court on defendants Mark Bliss and Lanny Hanks' (collectively, "Nebraska Defendants") motion for summary judgment on Henry Zitterkopf's state law claim for malicious prosecution and Iziah Zitterkopf's state law claims for assault and battery (Filing No. 92). The Nebraska Defendants
claim, in part, that they are entitled to summary judgment on the stated claims based on sovereign immunity. The sovereign
immunity argument was raised for the first time in the Nebraska Defendants' reply brief. Because plaintiffs did not have the
opportunity to address the sovereign immunity argument, the Court
will give plaintiffs the opportunity to respond to the argument before ruling on the summary judgment motion. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiffs are granted leave to file a sur-reply brief that addresses the merits of the Nebraska Defendants' sovereign immunity argument. shall be filed on or before June 7, 2010. DATED this 21st day of May, 2010. BY THE COURT: /s/ Lyle E. Strom ____________________________ LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge United States District Court The sur-reply brief
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?