Maria R., et al. v. William Nulick, et al.
| Maria R, Kari R, Vicky P and Natasha P |
| William Nulick, Tulare County Sheriff and County of Tulare |
| 1:2015cv01378 |
| September 9, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Fresno Office |
| Fresno |
| UnassignedDJ |
| Gary S. Austin |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
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
75
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 3/31/17 ORDERING that Plaintiff's above-styled action, Maria R. et al. v. Nulick, et al, Case No. 1:15-cv-01378-JAM-EPG, is accordingly DISMISSED with prejudice. Each party shall be responsible for their own costs and expenses. CASE CLOSED (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
64
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (ECF No. 50) signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 12/19/2016: Plaintiff's motion for sanctions 50 is DENIED. (Valdez, E)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER GRANTING plaintiff Maria R.'s Motion to Compel, document 41 . Order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 12/12/2016. (Rooney, M)
|
|
Filing
40
Order requiring production of certain documents withheld pursuant to the "Official Information Privilege" pursuant to confidential protective order, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 11/14/2016. ( Defendants shall provide Plaintiff with documents withheld under the official information privilege and provided in camera to the Court as described in the order by 11/22/2016.) (Thorp, J)
|
|
Filing
39
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 11/08/2016. (Butolph, J)
|
|
Filing
35
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 9/1/2016 ORDERING all discovery shall be completed by the close of business on 12/12/2016. (Jackson, T)
|
|
Filing
33
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 8/29/2016 ORDERING that all parties are to serve their disclosure of Expert Witness(es) by the close of business 11/18/2016; all parties are to serve the disclosure of their Supplemental Expert Witness(es) by the close of business on 12/2/2016. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
30
ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 5/11/2016 GRANTING 26 Motion to Dismiss the tenth and eleventh causes of action WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; DENYING 26 Motion to Dismiss all other causes of action; GRANTING the plaintiffs twenty days to file an amended complaint curing the defects identified in the tenth and/or eleventh causes of action; ORDERING the defendants to file a responsive pleading twenty days thereafter; ADVISING the plaintiffs that a failure to cure the defects identified in this Order may be grounds for dismissal of those claims without further leave to amend; SANCTIONING Defendants' counsel $100.00, to be paid within five days, for exceeding the page limit re 28 Reply as outlined in the Order re Filing Requirements (ECF 19-1). (Michel, G.)
|
|
Filing
21
STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 12/28/15 ordering (., Discovery due by 11/11/2016., Dispositive Motions filed by 12/13/2016, Any hearings on such motions shall be on 1/10/17 at 1:30p.m., Designation of Expert Wi tnesses due by 9/9/2016, Supplemental Disclosure and disclosure of any rebuttal experts due by 9/16/16, Final Pretrial Conference set for 2/10/2017 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez., Jury Trial set for 3/20/2017 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez.) (Plummer, M)
|
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.
