Lacey Sculls et al v. City of Los Angeles et al
| Lacey Sculls and Jonny Sculls |
| CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Ezett Smith, DOES 1-10 Inclusive and Watch Commander Ezett Smith |
| 2:2021cv08624 |
| November 1, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Michael R Wilner |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 29, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant City of Los Angeles, (Shepherd, Surekha) |
| Filing 13 CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P 73(b), filed by Defendant City of Los Angeles. (Shepherd, Surekha) |
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 with JURY DEMAND filed by Defendant City of Los Angeles.(Attorney Surekha A Shepherd added to party City of Los Angeles(pty:dft))(Shepherd, Surekha) |
| Filing 11 REMINDER NOTICE re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. Each party must file form CV-11C within the consent deadlines pursuant to L.R. 73-2. Additionally, the parties are directed to L.R. 73-2.2 Proof of Service. In any case in which only a magistrate judge is initially assigned, plaintiff must file a proof of service within 10 days of service of the summons and complaint as to each defendant. (vm) |
Filing 10
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE: PROOF OF SERVICE by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. The Court reviewed Plaintiffs proof of service. (Docket # 9.) The previous order is DISCHARGED with no further consequence. (vm)
|
| Filing 9 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Lacey Sculls, Jonny Sculls, upon Defendant City of Los Angeles served on 12/1/2021, answer due 12/22/2021. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Diana Carbajal in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Attachments: #1 POS City)(O'Connor, Deirdre) |
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued as to Defendant City of Los Angeles, Ezett Smith. re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 (vm) |
| Filing 7 STATEMENT OF CONSENT TO PROCEED before the assigned Magistrate Judge filed by Plaintiffs Jonny Sculls, Lacey Sculls. (O'Connor, Deirdre) |
| Filing 6 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff Jonny Sculls, Lacey Sculls. (O'Connor, Deirdre) |
|
Filing 5
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE: STATUS REPORT ON SERVICE OF PROCESS IN CIVIL ACTION by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. Plaintiff may discharge this order by filing a statement (not to exceed 3 pages) plus proof of service of process by or before December 13, 2021. (See Minute Order for further details) (vm)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Michael R. Wilner. (Attachments: #1 CV-11C Statement of Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge) (ghap) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs Jonny Sculls, Lacey Sculls, (O'Connor, Deirdre) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs Jonny Sculls, Lacey Sculls. (O'Connor, Deirdre) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: BCACDC-32253910 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiffs Lacey Sculls, Jonny Sculls. (Attorney Deirdre L O'Connor added to party Jonny Sculls(pty:pla), Attorney Deirdre L O'Connor added to party Lacey Sculls(pty:pla))(O'Connor, Deirdre) |
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.
