Davis v. Woodford et al

Davis v. Woodford et al

Case Number:	2:2005cv01898
Filed:	September 20, 2005
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
Presiding Judge:	Edmund F. Brennan
Presiding Judge:	Frank C. Damrell
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
March 24, 2015	Filing 182 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/23/2015 DENYING plaintiff's 175 Motion for New Trial. (Marciel, M)
February 20, 2015	Filing 181 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 2/19/15. Plaintiff's objections are OVERRULED and Defendants are granted costs in the amount of $758.80. (Manzer, C)
December 3, 2014	Filing 166 AMENDED ORDER AND WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AD TESTIFICANDUM ISSUED signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/03/14 ordering the Custodian to produce Charles T. Davis on 12/08/14 at 8:30 a.m. in courtroom 6 before Judge John A. Mendez. Custodian is ordered to notify the court of any changes in custody and to provide new custodian with a copy of this writ. Clerk shall serve a copy of this order and writ on the Custodian and Out-to-Court Desk. (cc: OTCD) (Plummer, M)
November 7, 2014	Filing 148 ORDER AND WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS AD TESTIFICANDUM ISSUED signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/7/2014 ORDERING the custodian to produce Charles T. Davis P-05063 to testify in USDC at 9:00 AM on 12/8/2014 in courtroom #6, before Judge Joh n A. Mendez; custodian is ordered to notify the court of any change in custody of this inmate and is ordered to provide the new custodian with a copy of this writ; and the Clerk to serve a copy of this order and writ on the Out-to-Court Desk and SATF Warden. (cc: OTCD-SAC) (Yin, K)
October 10, 2014	Filing 144 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 10/9/14 DENYING 142 Motion to appear at the October 30, 2014 settlement conference via video-conference. (Dillon, M)
August 12, 2014	Filing 137 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 8/11/14 ORDERING that the Plaintiff's 130 Objections to the Pretrial Order are overruled. (Manzer, C)
July 24, 2014	Filing 136 ORDER and WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS AD TESTIFICANDUM ISSUED signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 7/24/14 ORDERING the Custodian to produce Charles David at 9:00 am on October 30, 2014 in Courtroom 26 before Judge Allison Claire. Custodian is ordered to notify the Court of any changes in custody and to provide new custodian with a copy of this writ. Clerk shall serve a copy of this order and writ on the Custodian and Out-to-Court Desk. (cc: OTCD)(Dillon, M)
June 5, 2014	Filing 128 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 6/4/14 ORDERING that Plaintiff's "Objections," construed as a MOTION For Certification of Interlocutory Appeal 126 , is DENIED.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
May 23, 2014	Filing 127 PRETRIAL ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 5/22/14 ORDERING that the Clerk is directed to update and delete D.L. Runnels from the case caption, as defendant Runnels has been dismissed. Plaintiff's 117 Motion for Issuance of the Subpoena Duces Tecum Upon Hostile Witnesses & Request to Assign Marshal Fees to the Defendants for Service of the Processes & Costs is DENIED. The parties shall mail copies of their exhibits, schedules, and summaries and other items they anticipate offering into evidence to all other parties no later than twenty eight days before trial. Objections to a party's items of evidence sought to be introduced into evidence shall be filed no later than 21 days before trial. Motions i n limine shall be filed no later than 21 days before trial. Trial briefs, proposed jury voir dire, proposed jury instructions, and any agreed statement of the case shall be filed no later than 14 days before trial. Each party is granted 30 days to object to this Pretrial Order. Each party is also granted 14 days thereafter to respond to the other party's objections. (Kastilahn, A)
March 12, 2014	Filing 125 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/12/14 AFFIRMING 119 ORDER and TERMINATING 123 Motion for Reconsideration. (Meuleman, A)
January 2, 2014	Filing 119 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 1/2/14 DENYING 118 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dillon, M)
December 3, 2013	Filing 109 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/03/13 recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
October 24, 2013	Filing 108 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 10/24/2013 ORDERING that within 30 days, plaintiff shall file and serve a pretrial statement and any motions necessary to obtain trial witnesses; defendants' pretrial statement due not later than 30 days after the filing of plaintiff's statement; pretrial conference will be conducted on the file only; and the date for jury trial before a district judge will be set in the pretrial order.(Yin, K)
October 23, 2013	Filing 107 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 10/23/2013. The 98 Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations which grants defendants' 82 Motion for Summary Judgment in part is CONFIRMED. Clerk shall TERMINATE plaintiff's 104 Motion for Reconsideration. (Marciel, M)
September 10, 2013	Filing 101 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 9/10/2013 REQUESTING confidential settlement statements for prisoner settlement program to be submitted by the parties,no later than 30 days, as described in this order. (cc: ADR)(Yin, K)
September 5, 2013	Filing 98 ORDER adopting 96 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 9/4/13: Defendants' motion for summary judgment 82 , is granted as to defendants Miranda and Runnels, and denied as to defendants Amero, Hougland, Von Rader, and Simmerson. (Kaminski, H)
July 29, 2013	Filing 96 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 07/29/13 recommending that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted as to defendants Miranda and Runnels and denied as to defendants Amero, Hougland, Von Rader and Simmerson. MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT 82 referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
May 13, 2013	Filing 91 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 05/13/13 ordering plaintiff's motion to compel 83 is denied. Plaintiff's motion for a rule 56(d) continuance 84 is denied. Plaintiff's motion to compel production of the deposi tion transcript 88 is granted. Plaintiff's response to defendants' 12/21/12 motion for summary judgment is long overdue. Within 30 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file either an opposition to the motion or a statement of no opposition. (Plummer, M)
December 3, 2012	Filing 80 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/30/2012 AFFIRMING Magistrate Judge Brennan's 75 Order denying Motions to Compel, for Sanctions, and to Modify Scheduling Order. (Marciel, M)
October 25, 2012	Filing 77 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 10/24/2012 ADOPTING 71 Findings and Recommendations in full; GRANTING in part 36 Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint; DISMISSING, without leave to amend, Plaintiffs due process, § 1985(2), and § 1986 claims; DISMISSING, with leave to amend, Plaintiffs retaliation claims against Meier, Barnes, Wagner, and Coe, and Plaintiffs § 1983 conspiracy claims; ORDERING Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint within 30 days; VACATING the deadline for filing dispositive motions. (Michel, G)
September 25, 2012	Filing 75 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 9/25/2012 denying without prejudice plaintiff's motion to compel 52 and related motions for sanctions and to modify the scheduling order 53 , 54 & 62 . (Hinkle, T)
August 22, 2012	Filing 71 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 08/22/12 recommending that defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's second amended complaint 36 be granted in part; Plaintiff's due process section 1985(2) and section 1986 claims be dismissed without leave to amend; Plaintiff's retaliation claims against Meier, Barnes, Wagner and Coe and plaintiff's section 1983 claims be dismissed with leave to amend; plaintiff be granted leave to file a third amended complaint, as provided herein, within 30 days of the filing date of any order adopting these findings and recommendations. MOTION to DISMISS 36 referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
January 4, 2012	Filing 49 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 1/4/12 DENYING 47 Motion to Prevent Discovery. (Meuleman, A)
November 4, 2011	Filing 46 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/03/11 granting 42 Motion to take plaintiff's deposition by videoconference. Defendants' request to take the depositions of all other witnesses by videoconference is denied without prejudice. (Plummer, M)
October 6, 2011	Filing 35 ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 10/5/2011 ADOPTING 23 Findings and Recommendations in full. Plaintiffs claims against CDCR and various defendants for violating regulations contained within title 15 of the California Code of Regulations are DISMISSED without leave to amend. (Michel, G)
June 7, 2011	Filing 23 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/7/11 DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT SERVICE DOCUMENTS and USM-285 Forms. Service is appropriate for Amero, Barns, Coe, C. Houylond, Meier, Miranda, D. L. Runnels, Simmerson, Von Rader, Wagner. Clerk to send plaintiff: 1 Summons, 10 USM-285 Forms, and 1 copy of the Amended Complaint filed on 2/20/07. The following claims are dismissed with leave to amend: (1) the claims against defendant Wilson; (2) the claim that California Code of Regulations, title 15, §§ 3190(k) and 3191(c)-(d) are unconstitutional; (3) that California Code of Regulations, title 15, § 3314(c) and California Penal Code § 832.5 are unconstitutional applied to prisone rs; and/or (4) the claimsagainst various defendants for violating California Civil Code §§ 51.7 and 52. (a). Within 30 days of service of this order, plaintiff may amend his complaint to attempt to state cognizable claims against these defe ndants. The request for counsel is DENIED. It is RECOMMENDED that plaintiffs claims against CDCR and against various defendants for violating regulations contained within title 15 of the California Code of Regulations be dismissed without leave to amend. Referred to Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis v. Woodford 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.

Why Is My Information Online?