Clark v. McGuire et al
| Loureece Clark |
| Thomas McGuire and Karl Griffiths |
| 2:2012cv02159 |
| August 17, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| 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
59
ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 07/27/17 ORDERING that defendant McGuire's 28 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A)
|
|
Filing
56
ORDER ADOPTING 53 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 05/14/15 and ORDERING that the 50 Motion to Stay is GRANTED. This action is STAYED pending resolution of defendant's appeal by the Ninth Circuit. (Benson, A)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 03/12/15 ORDERING that the jury trial set for 04/06/15 before Judge Mendez is vacated. Also, RECOMMENDING that defendants motion to stay 50 be granted; and this action be stayed pending resolution of defendant's appeal in the 9th circuit. MOTION to STAY 50 referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
40
ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/28/2014 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 36 are ADOPTED in FULL; and Defendant's 28 Summary Judgment motion is GRANTED as to defendant Karl Griffiths and DENIED as to defendant McGuire. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
36
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/2/2014 RECOMMENDING that the 28 Motion for Summary Judgment be granted as to Defendant Griffiths; RECOMMENDING that the 28 Motion for Summary Judgment be denied as to Defendant McGuire; REFERRING this matter to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; ORDERING that any objections be filed within fourteen days. (Michel, G)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/08/14 ordering that plaintiff is granted 30 days from the date of this order to file his opposition to defendants' summary judgment motion. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
30
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/27/13 ordering that within 30 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any he has, to the summary judgment motion or a statement of non-opposition. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/25/13 denying 25 Motion for transcript. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 05/13/13 ordering within 14 days from the date of this order, defendants Griffiths and McGuire shall each pay to the U.S. Marshal the sum of $55.00 unless within that time defendants file a written statement showing good cause for their failure to waive service. The court does not intend to extend this 14 day period. The clerk of the court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the U.S. Marshal. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Loureece Clark signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/16/2012. CDC is to collect an initial partial filing fee and thereafter the balance in monthly payments and forward to the clerk until the $350 filing fee is paid in full. The Clerk is directed to serve this order and copy of plaintiff's IFP on the Director of CDC. The Clerk to also serve Financial with a copy of this order. (cc: CDC, Financial)(Yin, K)
|
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.
