Dagdagan v. City of Vallejo et al
Plaintiff: Macario Belen Dagdagan
Defendant: City of Vallejo, J. Wentz and John Boyd
Case Number: 2:2008cv00922
Filed: May 1, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Civil Rights: Other Office
County: Solano
Presiding Judge: Garland E. Burrell
Presiding Judge: Gregory G. Hollows
Nature of Suit: Both
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 27, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 108 ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 3/26/12; The parties filed a Notice of Settlement on March 26, 2012, in which they state, the parties have entered into a settlement in the above-referenced matter and request the Court grant them sixty (60) days with which to complete and file all respective dismissals and necessary dispositive documentation. (ECF No. 107, 2:1-4.) Therefore, a dispositional document shall be filed no later than May 28, 2012. Failure to respond by this deadline may be construed as consent to dismissal of this action without prejudice, and a dismissal order could be filed. See E.D. Cal. R. 160(b) (A failure to file dispositional papers on the date prescribed by the Court may be grounds for sanctions.). Further, the final pretrial conference scheduled on April 9, 2012, and trial scheduled to commence on June 19, 2012, are vacated. A status conference is scheduled to commence at 9:00 a.m. on June 25, 2012, in the event no dispositional document is filed, or if this action is not otherwise dismissed. A joint status report shall be filed fourteen (14) days prior to the status conference. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Matson, R)
November 21, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 105 ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 11/18/11: Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment on Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claim against Detective Melville and Plaintiff's Monell claims is granted; Plaintiff's substantive due process claim against Defendants Wentz and Boyd is dismissed; and Plaintiff's motions are denied. (Kaminski, H)
November 3, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 104 ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 11/3/2011 ORDERING Pltf's 103 Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. (Zignago, K.)
October 11, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 95 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/07/11 ORDERING that plf's 85 Motion for Sanctions is DENIED. (Benson, A.)
October 7, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 91 ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 10/7/2011 ORDERING that the Clerk shall file Pltf's "Request to File Documents Under Seal" on the public docket. Pltf's Request is DENIED. (Zignago, K.)
August 26, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 84 SUPPLEMENTAL STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr., on 8/26/11. The status (pretrial scheduling) conference scheduled for 8/29/11 is VACATED. Discovery is DUE by 2/29/2012. The last hearing date for motions previo usly deemed withdrawn shall be 10/24/11 at 9:00 a.m. The Final Pretrial Conference is SET for 4/9/2012 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.. The parties shall file a JOINT pretrial statement no later than seven calendar days prior to the final pretrial conference. Trial is SET for 6/19/2012 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.. (Kastilahn, A)
February 26, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 76 ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 2/25/2010 ORDERING that Dfts' 66 Motion to Stay is GRANTED. This action is STAYED pending resolution of Dfts' interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit. The pending Motions for Summary Judgment are deemed WITHDRAWN, and may be re-noticed for hearing after Dfts' appeal is resolved. All scheduled dates are VACATED; an amended pretrial scheduling order will issue after the appeal is resolved. (Engbretson, K.)
February 10, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 68 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SHORTEN TIME signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 2/9/10: HEARING as to 66 MOTION to STAY is set for 2/22/2010 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. and as to 64 MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT is continued until 3/22/2010 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr.. (Kaminski, H)
January 29, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 59 ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr., on 1/28/2010, ORDERING that pltf's motion to compel production of the designated internal affairs complaints from the two year period outlined by the magistrate judge is GRANTED. However, pltf's motion to compel answers to the deposition questions is DENIED. (Kastilahn, A)
January 7, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 57 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 37 Motion for Summary Judgment signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 1/6/10: Defendants' motions are DENIED. (Kaminski, H)
December 15, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 12/15/2009 ORDERING the rulings in the summary order are explained and confirmed.(Matson, R)
November 12, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 11/10/09 GRANTING 49 Ex Parte Application. Expert Discovery due by 2/11/2010; last hearing date for motions is 3/22/10; Final Pretrial Conference set for 5/24/2010 at 02:30 PM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. (Owen, K)
November 6, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 48 SUMMARY ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/6/09 ORDERING that pltf's 43 motions to compel be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as set forth in the order. (Yin, K)
October 28, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 10/28/09: Plaintiff's application for order shortening time, filed October 28, 2009, is granted 44 . HEARING as to 43 MOTIONS to COMPEL set for 11/5/2009 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (GGH) before Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows. No further applications for order shortening time will be granted. (Kaminski, H)
July 22, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 36 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER regarding confidential materials signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/22/09. (Carlos, 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: Dagdagan v. City of Vallejo et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Macario Belen Dagdagan
Represented By: Todd Boley
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of Vallejo
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: J. Wentz
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: John Boyd
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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?