Ware v. McDonald et al
| Martin Ware |
| M. McDonald, C. Fackrell, W. Hanks, C. Holt, G. Giessner and D. Glover |
| 2:2012cv01505 |
| June 4, 2012 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Kern |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| Morrison C. England |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
118
FURTHER SCHEDULING ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/25/2017: Discovery is CLOSED; Law and Motion is CLOSED; Plaintiff's pretrial statement and any motions necessary to obtain trial witnesses shall be filed on or before 6 /26/2017; Defendants' pretrial statement shall be filed on or before 7/10/2017; Pretrial conference is set for 9/25/2017 before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman, to be conducted on the file only; the date for jury trial will be set in the pretrial order. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
117
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/31/2017 ORDERING that the 114 findings and recommendations are ADOPTED in full. Plaintiff's 97 motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED. Defendants' 96 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendants Green, Tancreto, Hanks and Fackrell are DISMISSED from this action with prejudice. This matter is REMANDED to the Magistrate Judge for further scheduling. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
114
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/8/2017 RECOMMENDING plaintiff's 97 motion for partial summary judgment be denied. Defendants' 96 motion for summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part as follows: (a) All defendants are entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's claim that defendants failed to protect him in violation of the Eighth Amendment; (b) Defendants Tancreto and Green be granted summary judgment on plaint iff's excessive force claims; and (c) The motion for summary judgment by defendants Holt, Giessner, and Glover, on plaintiff's excessive force claims be denied. Defendants Green, Tancreto, Hanks, and Fackrell be dismissed from this action with prejudice; and this matter be remanded to the undersigned for further scheduling. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
113
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/6/17 DENYING without prejudice 110 Motion.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
106
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 07/19/16 ordering the court will consider plaintiffs perfected declaration and affidavit in connection with the pending motion for summary judgment. The Clerk of the Court is directed to docket a copy of plaintiffs affidavit, (ECF No. 103 at 16-17) as ECF No. 102 -1. Within fourteen days from the date of this order, defendants shall file a response to plaintiffs declarations, as discussed above, and shall submit the items missing from their prior briefing. The remainder of plaintiffs surreply 103 is disregarded.(Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
94
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/24/15 ordering that plaintiff's request 93 is denied without prejudice. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
92
ORDER and REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/7/15 ORDERING that Plaintiffs motion to compel discovery 89 is DENIED. Plaintiffs motion to extend the discovery deadline 89 is PARTIALLY GRANTED. Plaintiffs request 90 is PARTIALLY GRANTED. Within 21 days from the date of this order, defendants shall: a. Respond to plaintiff's "Second Request for Production of Documents," signed August 9, 2015. (ECF No. 89 at 11-12.)b. Make arrangemen ts for plaintiff to watch the use of force videotapes, and to take notes while he views them. Any motion to compel further production of responses to the second request for production of documents shall be filed on or before November 17, 2015. In light of the partial extension of discovery, the pretrial motions deadline, except motions to compel discovery, is continued to January 18, 2016.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
87
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/11/2015 DENYING plaintiff's 86 request, without prejudice. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/26/15 ordering that plaintiff's 06/22/15 filing 84 is retained in the court record and disregarded. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
82
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/01/15 ordering plaintiff's reply to defendants' answer 80 is disregarded. Plaintiff's request for a hearing is denied. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
72
ORDER adopting in full 70 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/18/15. Defendants' 63 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/09/14 ORDERING that plaintiff's request for the court to consider exhibits submitted with his prior opposition to the motion to dismiss 69 is granted. Also, RECOMMENDING that defendants' motion for summary judgment 63 be denied. MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT 63 referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
64
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/05/14 ordering plaintiff's request for a copy of his motion for extension of time to oppose the motion to dismiss 62 is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff's request for a copy of the 05/01/14 order 62 is granted. The clerk of the court shall re-serve a copy of the 5/01/14 order 61 on plaintiff at his current address. Plaintiff shall file his opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment on or before 07/14/14. Defendants' reply, if any, shall be filed within 7 days thereafter. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 05/01/14 denying 57 Motion to Dismiss. Defendants may file, within 30 days from the date of this order, a motion for summary judgement based on plaintiff's alleged failure to exhaust administrative remedies, that includes notice to plaintiff of the requirements for opposing the motion. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
56
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/27/13 ordering defendants' motion for an extension of time 55 is granted. Defendants shall respond to plaintiff's third amended complaint on or before 1/10/14. Plaintiff's motion 54 is denied. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/3/13 denying 50 Motion to Amend the Complaint as untimely. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER ADOPTING 43 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, in full, signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/19/2013. Plaintiff's 1st and 14th Amendment claims are DISMISSED. This action proceed on 8th Amendment and state law claims. Within 30 days from date of Order, plaintiff shall complete Notice of Submission of Documents and submit documents provided with 9/3/2013 43 Order. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
43
ORDER and FINDINGS and signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 09/03/13 ORDERING service is appropriate for defendants Hank, Green, Tancreto, Fackrell, Holt, Giessner and Glover. The clerk of the court shall send plaintiff 7 USM-285 forms, 1 summons, instruction sheet and a copy of the 05/20/13 third amended complaint to be completed and returned within 30 days. Also, RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's first and fourteenth amendment claims be dismissed. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 04/09/13 ordering plaintiff's second amended complaint 23 is dismissed with leave to amend. Within 30 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the attached Notice of Amendment and submit it along with an original and 1 copy of the third amended complaint. The clerk of the court shall send plaintiff the form for filing a civil rights action pursuant to 42 USC 1983. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/23/12 ORDERING that the September 14, 2012 findings and recommendations 22 are VACATED; Plaintiffs 27 motion is GRANTED in part; and Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the attached Notice of Election form, electing to (a) proceed on the September 17, 2012 second amended complaint, or (b) file a third amended complaint, and providing the original third amended complaint. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
22
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/13/2012 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 08/17/12 ordering that plaintiff's 08/09/12 motion 19 is denied without prejudice. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF INMATE FILING FEE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/27/2012 DIRECTING the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to collect and forward monthly payments from the Prison Account of Martin Ware to t he Clerk of Court until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full; DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to serve a copy of this order and a copy of the signed IFP Affidavit on the Director, California Department of Corrections; DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to serve a copy of this order on the Financial Department of the court. (cc: CDC Prisoner Payments Orders, Financial Sacramento) (Michel, G)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
