Gough et al v. Peace St. Joseph Medical Center
Michael Gough and Constance Gough |
Peace St Joseph Medical Center |
2:2012cv00346 |
February 29, 2012 |
US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
Seattle Office |
Whatcom |
Richard A Jones |
Americans with Disabilities - Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 86 ORDER Appointing Counsel from Pro Bono Panel by Judge Richard A Jones. The court hereby appoints Justo G. Gonzalez and the firm of Stokes Lawrence, P.S., as counsel for plaintiffs. (CL) (cc: pltfs) |
Filing 82 ORDER REFERRING TO PRO BONO PANEL by Judge Richard A Jones. (RS) cc pro se parties, Sharon |
Filing 74 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Richard A Jones. The court ORDERS Mr. Davis to SHOW CAUSE no later than Friday, December 13, 2013, why he should not be sanctioned $500 for violating a prior order of the court. (CL) |
Filing 70 ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones. The court DENIES the parties' stipulated motion to grant leave to withdraw as attorney for plaintiffs. Dkt. # 69 . The parties may re-file a stipulated motion that complies with all the requirements of LCR 83.2(b). (CL) |
Filing 26 ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones. The court DENIES Defendant's 14 motion for partial summary judgment. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter an amended scheduling order with a new trial date of August 19, 2013. (CL) |
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 Washington Western 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.