Stewart v. Central Arizona Correction Facility et al
Plaintiff:
Jenghiz K Stewart
Defendant:
Central Arizona Correction Facility, Beezy, Jackie Boughter, Hernandez, Hamadi and Phan
Case Number:
2:2009cv00674
Filed:
April 1, 2009
Court:
Arizona District Court
Office:
Prisoner - Prison Condition Office
County:
Pinal
Presiding Judge:
Mary H Murguia
Referring Judge:
Edward C Voss (PS)
Nature of Suit:
None
Cause of Action:
Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:
42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Date Filed | # | Document Text |
|---|---|---|
| July 14, 2010 | 196 |
ORDER that the reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Defendants Bezy and Hernandez's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 91), in which Defendants Boughter, Phan, and Hamidi join (Doc. ##93, 94); Defendants' Motion for Summary D isposition (Doc. 161); and all other pending motions. Granting 91 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff's claims are dismissed without prejudice. Denying as moot 161 Motion for Ruling; 182 Motion for Reconsideration ; 191 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; 192 Motion to Appoint; 193 Motion for Ruling. The case is terminated, and the Clerk of Court must enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 7/9/10.(DMT)
|
| May 5, 2010 | 148 |
ORDER denying 114 Defendants Boughter and Phan's Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 5/3/10.(LSP)
|
| December 22, 2009 | 104 |
ORDER denying 86 Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Order and denying 89 Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Order. The Clerk is directed to provide Plaintiff with a copy of 24 Defendants' Notice of Joinder in Defendant Hamidis Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 12/16/09.(LSP)
|
| November 9, 2009 | 77 |
ORDER that the reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Hamidi' s Motion to Dismiss 11 , in which Bezy and Hernandez join 24 , and Defendants' Motions to Strike (Doc. ## 47 , 48 ). Denying as moot 47 Motion to Strike ; deny ing as moot 48 Motion to Strike. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to respond to Bezy and Hernandez's joinder (contained in Doc. #56) is denied as unnecessary. Denying without prejuidce 11 Motion to Dismiss Case. Defendants have 30 days to file another motion to dismiss on the ground of failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 11/5/09.(DMT, )
|
| April 21, 2009 | 5 |
ORDER (Service Packet), Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 3 is granted. Count Six and Defendant Central Arizona Detention Facility are dismissed without prejudice. Defendants Breezy, Boughter, Hernandez, Hamadi, and Phan m ust answer Counts One through Five. The Clerk of Court must send Plaintiff a service packet including the Complaint (Doc. #1), this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for Defendants Breezy, Boughter, Hernandez, Hamadi, and Phan. P laintiff must complete and return the service packet to the Clerk of Court within 20 days of the date of filing of this Order. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Edward C. Voss for all pretrial proceedings as authorized under 28 U.S.C. § ; 636(b)(1). Magistrate Judge Edward C Voss added. Magistrate Judge Edward C Voss (PS) no longer assigned to case. Central Arizona Correction Facility terminated. Service Packet due by 5/11/2009. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 4/17/09. (DMT, )
|
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 Arizona 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.
