Scheafnocker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Case Number: 2:2005cv02002
Filed: October 4, 2005
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
Presiding Judge: Ralph R. Beistline
Presiding Judge: Edmund F. Brennan
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
February 4, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 48 [VACATED PER 52 ORDER] FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 2/1/08 RECOMMENDING that Defendant's 5/11/07, Rule 12(c) Motion 42 be denied without prejudice to renewal upon the filing of supplemental bri efing. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge Ralph R. Beistline. Within ten (10) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, any party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. (Mena-Sanchez, L) Modified on 2/20/2008 (Benson, A).
February 1, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 47 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 2/1/08 RECOMMENDING that Dft's 42 Rule 12(c) Motion be denied without prejudice. Objections to F&Rs due within 10 days. Motion referred to Judge Ralph R. Beistline. (Engbretson, K.)
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: Scheafnocker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
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?