Lucas v. Arnold, et al
| 2:2004cv00586 |
| March 23, 2004 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Garland E. Burrell |
| Craig M. Kellison |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
177
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 4/2/09 ORDERING a Telephonic Pretrial hearing set for 4/7/2009 at 01:30 PM in Redding (CMK) before Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
138
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 02/13/09 ORDERING that the 03/24/09 trial date before Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. is VACATED; a Status Conference is SET for 02/19/09 at 10:00 AM in Redding (CMK) before Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison; the parties shall file a joint status report by 02/17/09. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
102
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, recommending that defendant's 86 Motion for Summary Judgment be granted in part and denied part, signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 2/1/08. Within 20 days after being served with these F/Rs, any party may file written Objections with Court. (Marciel, 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
| Search for this case: Lucas v. Arnold, et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
