Espritt v. Saesee et al
Brian Espritt |
A. Saesee, S. Hill, S. Torres, J. Davis, M. Lopez, A. Ballesteros, Y. Magallon, Velazquez, Furlong, Black, Sumpter and Goss |
1:2011cv00519 |
March 28, 2011 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Fresno Office |
Kings |
Michael J. Seng |
Oliver W. Wanger |
Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 92 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS re 72 Defendants' Motion for Summary JUDGMENT, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 9/3/15. Referred to Judge Ishii. Objections to F&R Due Within Thirty Days. (Gonzalez, R) |
Filing 82 ORDER STRIKING SURREPLY 81 ; PERMITTING PLAINTIFF OPPORTUNITY TO WITHDRAW OPPOSITION AND FILE AMENDED OPPOSITION signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 5/20/2015. (Filing Deadline: 6/22/2015). (Lundstrom, T) |
Filing 68 ORDER Adopting 67 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION; ORDER DENYINGDefendants' 56 Motion to Dismiss; ORDER for Defendants to File Motion or Answer within Thirty Days signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/15/2014. (Sant Agata, S) |
Filing 67 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that Defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Exhaust Remedies, Filed on May 7, 2014, be DENIED; Defendants be Required to either file a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Albino v. Baca or File an Answer to the Second Amended Complaint re 17 and 56 ; referred to Judge Ishii, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 09/13/14. Objections to F&R due by 10/20/2014 (Martin-Gill, S) |
Filing 55 ORDER Denying Unenumerated Rule 12(b) Motion, Without Prejudice, On Procedural Grounds And Requiring Defendants To File Responsive Pleading Or Motion Within Thirty Days (Doc. 37 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 4/11/2014. (Fahrney, E) |
Filing 51 ORDER DENYING 50 Motion to Amend the Complaint and STRIKING the Proposed Third Amended Complaint Lodged on March 24, 2014; ORDER STRIKING Plaintiff's Motion to Amend, to the Extent it acts as an Impermissible Surreply, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 03/28/14. (Martin-Gill, S) |
Filing 39 ORDER DENYING 38 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 10/3/2013. (Sant Agata, S) |
Filing 33 ORDER Adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 30 ), ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion For Preliminary Injunctive Relief (Doc. 21 ), signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 6/19/2013. (Fahrney, E) |
Filing 30 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, Recommending That This Action Proceed Only Against Defendants Saesee, Hill, Torres, Davis, Lopez, Ballesteros, and Magallon on Plaintiff's Claims for Excessive Force, and That All Other Claims and Defendants be Dismissed From This Action, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 4/29/13. Referred to Judge Ishii; Objections, If Any, Due in Thirty Days. (Gonzalez, R) |
Filing 28 ORDER Adopting Findings and Recommendations 23 ; ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief 21 , signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 4/26/13. (Verduzco, M) |
Filing 23 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending that Plaintiff's 21 Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief be Denied; Objections, if any, Due in 30 Days signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 3/7/2013. Referred to Judge Anthony W. Ishii. Objections to F&R due by 4/9/2013. (Sant Agata, S) |
Filing 8 ORDER Denying 7 Motion to Appoint Counsel, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 6/14/11. (Gonzalez, R) |
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 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.