Harvey v. City of South Lake Tahoe et al
| Daniel Thomas Harvey |
| Jake Herminghaus, Shannon Laney, Andrew Eissinger, City of South Lake Tahoe, Douglas County, Robert K. Priscaro and El Dorado County |
| 2:2012cv00526 |
| February 28, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| El Dorado |
| Edmund F. Brennan |
| Kimberly J. Mueller |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
36
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on March 30, 2013. Granting each of the three motions to dismiss 4 , 8 , and 19 ; adopting 32 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; directing Clerk to CLOSE CASE. (Andrews, P)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 2/21/13 ORDERING With regard to the second action, 2:12-cv-526-KJM-EFB, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status (pretrial scheduling) conference currently set for Ma y 15, 2013 is vacated; and RECOMMENDING that each of the three motions to dismiss, Dckt. Nos. 4, 8, and 19, be granted without leave to amend; and the Clerk be directed to close the second case, 2:12-cv-526-KJM-EFB. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Becknal, R) (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/28/2012 ORDERING 24 In light of that representation, the 6/14/2012 order to show cause is DISCHARGED; although plaintiff may not have initially received defendants' 5/8/2012 notice that t he motion to dismiss was re-set for hearing, because plaintiff was notified of the 7/17/2012 hearing date in the 6/14/2012 order to show cause, the 7/17/2012 hearing date will remain on calendar at this time; in accordance with Local Rule 230, plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion on or before 7/3/2012, and defendants shall file a reply thereto on or before 7/10/2012. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/14/12: Motion Hearing as to 19 Motion to Dismiss reset for 7/17/2012 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. Plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE by 7 /2/2012 why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition to the pending motions; Response to the motion due no later than 7/2/12; Initial Scheduling Conference set for 11/14/2012 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. Status reports due by 10/31/12. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 05/16/12 ORDERING that, pursuant to 20 Stipulation, the Initial Scheduling Conference is ADVANCED to 08/22/12 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. All other dates and requirements as set forth in the Court's 18 05/07/12 Order setting status conference shall remain the same. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 05/07/12 SETTING an Initial Scheduling Conference set for 09/05/12 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. Parties shall file status reports 14 days prior to the conference. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 4/28/12 ORDERING that the 5/3/12 hearing on the two Motions to Dismiss 4 , 8 is dropped from calendar. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
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.
