Shaw v. Sacramento County Sheriff's Department
Plaintiff: Sheena Shaw
Defendant: Sacramento County Sheriff's Department
Case Number: 2:2016cv00729
Filed: April 6, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Carolyn K. Delaney
Presiding Judge: Troy L. Nunley
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
February 13, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 96 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 02/12/24 DENYING 88 Motion to Dismiss, DENYING 92 Motion for Sanctions, and DIRECTING Defendants to file an answer no later than 21 days from the electronic filing date of this Order. (Licea Chavez, V)
February 16, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 86 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 02/15/23 GRANTING 71 Motion to Dismiss with 30 days LEAVE to AMEND and Defendants' responsive pleading due 21 days after the Amended Complaint is filed; DENYING 75 77 Motions for Sanctions. (Benson, A.)
March 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 68 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 03/07/22 GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 64 Motion as follows: the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion under Rule 60(b) as to those claims that were properly dismissed, but the Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to amend her complaint solely to plead a false arrest claim. Amended Complaint due within 30 days; Defendants' responsive pleading due within 21 days thereafter. (Benson, A.)
October 25, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 10/24/2018 GRANTING Defendants' 32 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's claims 1-11 and DENYING as moot Plaintiff's 49 Request for Reconsideration. CASE CLOSED. (York, M)
March 23, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 48 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/23/18 ORDERING that Defendants' Motion to Stay 42 is GRANTED. And Discovery in this matter is STAYED until resolution of the 6/23/17 Motion to Dismiss, at which time the parties may stipulate to new discovery deadlines and/or proceed according to any subsequent scheduling order. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
July 6, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 7/6/2017 GRANTING 33 Request to Seal Documents. (Donati, J)
November 3, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/2/2016 GRANTING 13 request for an extension of time and hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to file an amended complaint with the Court by 11/30/2016. (Butolph, J)
September 28, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/28/16: VACATING 8 Findings and Recommendations; Plaintiff should file and amended complaint no later than 10/31/2016; GRANTING 9 Motion to Appoint Counsel and APPOINTING Jeff D. Price for Sheena Shaw. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order upon Jeff D. Price. This matter is referred back to the District Judge assigned to this action. All dates pending before the undersigned are vacated. Henceforth the caption on documents filed in this action shall be 2:16-cv-0729-TLN-CKD.(Washington, S)
September 1, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 8 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/1/2016 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Zignago, K.)
July 25, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 7/22/2016 ORDERING that plaintiff is GRANTED an extension of time to 8/25/2016 to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff's 6 Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED. (Zignago, K.)
June 3, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 6/3/2016 ORDERING 4 that Plaintiff is GRANTED an extension of time to 7/8/2016 to file an amended complaint in compliance with the Court's 4/19/2016 order. (Reader, L)
April 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/19/16 ORDERING that Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted; Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed; and Plaintiff is granted twenty-eight days from the date of s ervice of this order to file an amended complaint that complies with the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice; the amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned this case and must be labeled "Amended Complaint"; plaintiff must file an original and two copies of the amended complaint; failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Becknal, R)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Shaw v. Sacramento County Sheriff's Department
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sheena Shaw
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Sacramento County Sheriff's Department
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?