Jennifer Happle v. City of Azusa et al
| Jennifer Happle |
| Eric Vazquez, City of Azusa, John Madaloni, Azusa Police Department and Does 1-10, inclusive |
| 2:2018cv05935 |
| July 6, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Paul L Abrams |
| Andre Birotte |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 28, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 AFFIDAVIT by affiant: Denise Happle re APPLICATION for Appointment of Denise Happle as Guardian ad Litem for Jennifer Happle #5 (Consent of Nominee Denise Happle to Appointment as Guardian Ad Litem for Jennifer Happle) filed by Plaintiff Jennifer Happle (Castillo, Javier) |
| Filing 5 APPLICATION for Appointment of Denise Happle as Guardian ad Litem for Jennifer Happle filed by Guardian Ad Litem Jennifer Happle. (Castillo, Javier) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Jennifer Happle, (Castillo, Javier) |
| Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Jennifer Happle. (Castillo, Javier) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Jennifer Happle. (Castillo, Javier) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-22052154 - Fee: $400, filed by Jennifer Happle Jennifer Happle. (Attorney Javier H Castillo added to party Jennifer Happle(pty:pla))(Castillo, Javier) |
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 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
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.
