Peeler v. Machado et al
| Brice A. Peeler |
| Machado, West, Ross, Barnhart, McKenzie and Bonner |
| 2:2013cv02429 |
| November 21, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Carolyn K. Delaney |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
69
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/20/15 DENYING without prejudice 58 Motion in Limine.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 8/4/15 ORDERING that 59 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS are VACATED; Plaintiff is granted 30 days within which to file his pretrial statement; Defendants shall file their pretrial statement within 14 days of service of plaintiffs. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
59
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 7/14/15 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 5/12/15 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 4/10/15 49 are ADOPTED in full; Defendants' MOTION for Summary Judgment 36 is GRANTED; and Defendants Barnhart and Ross are DISMISSED from this action. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/10/15 ORDERING that plaintiff's motion for leave to file a motion for summary judgment is denied. Also, RECOMMENDING that defendants' motion for summary judgment 36 be granted; and defendants Barnhardt and Ross be dismissed from this action. MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT 36 referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/26/15 denying 45 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
43
ORDER striking 42 Motion for Summary Judgment signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 03/12/15. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 10/27/14 denying 29 Motion for Extension and denying 30 Motion to Compel. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 08/19/14 granting 24 Motion to Amend the Complaint. Plaintiff's 07/21/14 first amended complaint is now the operative complaint in this action. Plaintiff's original complaint is dismissed. Defendants Barnhart, Machado, Ross and West shall file their responsive pleading within 14 days with respect to plaintiff's Fourth Amendment excessive force claims. All previously imposed deadlines remain in effect. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 7/21/14 DENYING 22 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER denying 9 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 03/19/14. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Brice A. Peeler signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/24/2013. The Sheriff is to collect an initial partial filing fee and thereafter the balance in monthly payments and forward to the Clerk until the $350 filing fee is paid in full. The Clerk is directed to serve this order and copy of plaintiff's IFP on the Sheriff of Sacrmento County. The Clerk shall also serve Financial with a copy of this order. (cc: Financial)(Yin, K)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
