Terrell Markham et al v. City of San Bernardino et al
| 2:2009cv08455 |
| November 17, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Bristow |
| Wright |
| Other |
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
73
ORDER re: Dismissal with Prejudice of Defendants by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. Pursuant to the Stipulation of Dismissal 72 entered by and between Plaintiffs, Terrell Markham, Sonja Edwards and Terry Markham and Defendants City of San Bernardino, et al., by and through their respective counsel of records, the Court orders this case to be dismissed with Prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, with each party to bear its own respective attorneys' fees and costs. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (smo)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE. LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Otis D. Wright, II:Parties TO SHOW CAUSE by Friday, November 8, 2013, why this matter should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. No hearing will be held. The Court willdischarge this Order upon filing of a joint status report. (lc)
|
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 Central 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
| Search for this case: Terrell Markham et al v. City of San Bernardino et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
