Wilson v. CA Dept Corrections, et al
| Jack Allen Wilson |
| California Department of Corrections, A Brown, W Pillor, R Spreister, R Aguirre, H Flores, D - Hill, - Thompson, J Poblete, Cal A Terhune, R Presley, George M Galaza, B Yee and M L Dr. M L Bendon, HCM |
| 1:2001cv06538 |
| December 10, 2001 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Fresno Office |
| Kings |
| Gary S. Austin |
| Lawrence J. O'Neill |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Both |
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
163
{JURY TRIAL VACATED PUSUANT TO ORDER 171 } SECOND SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER Requiring Parties to Notify Court Whether They Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Within Thirty Days; ORDER Directing Clerk's Office to Send Local Rule 16-2 81 to Plaintiff an Consent Forms to Parties, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/23/2009. Pretrial Conference set for 5/26/2009 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4(LJO) before District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. Jury Trial set for 6/29/2009 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4(LJO) before District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. (Sondheim, M)
|
|
Filing
162
ORDER ADOPTING 159 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, and DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and GRANTING in Part and DENYING in Part Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 1/22/2009. (Sondheim, M)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern 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.
