Estate of Anton Pat Barrett, et al. v. City of Vallejo, et al.
| Estate of Anton Pat Barrett, Anton Frank Barrett, Pashaney Barrett and Tasha Perry |
| City of Vallejo, Sean Kenney, Waylon Boyce and Mark Thompson |
| 2:2013cv00846 |
| April 30, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sonoma |
| Carolyn K. Delaney |
| John A. Mendez |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
66
ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(2) signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 8/19/15. CASE CLOSED. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
64
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/20/2015 ORDERING Tasha Perry appointed as guardian ad litem for A.P.B. and APPROVING minor's compromise. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
55
STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 5/19/2015 REFERRING this matter for a judicially-supervised settlement conference. (Michel, G.)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER AFTER HEARING signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 4/29/2015 ORDERING 50 Defendants 37 Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART; the Court further ORDERS dismissal of the Second Cause of Action in its entirety and dismissal of all DOE defendants. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 4/9/2015 GRANTING 44 Request to Seal Documents. (Michel, G.)
|
|
Filing
36
STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/19/15. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/18/15 ORDERING the February 25, 2015 hearing on the motion for contempt is vacated; the court finds that imposition of monetary sanctions in the circumstances of this case is not warranted and defendants' request 16 is therefore denied; the Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on Stacy Madkins, 915 Waterford Ave., Stockton, CA 95206. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/18/2015. Court finds the belated disclosure of plaintiff's expert is neither substantially justified nor harmless. Defendants' 23 Motion to Strike plaintiffs' expert is theref ore GRANTED. Plaintiffs' 26 Motion to Compel is GRANTED in part. No later than 2/23/2015, defendants shall produce documents identified in proposed [30-2] Protective Order at 2:5-3:4 (at p. 10-11). Said documents shall be produced subject to provisions of proposed [30-2] Protective Order (at p. 9-13). Defendants directed to submit proposed Protective Order in Word format for signature by Judge Delaney. The remainder of the 26 Motion to Compel is DENIED. (Marciel, M) (Main Document 34 replaced on 2/18/2015) (Marciel, M).
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/9/2015 GRANTING 24 & 25 Motions to Shorten Time. Opposition, if any, to defendants' 23 Motion to Strike and 26 Motion to Compel shall be filed no later than 2/17/2015 at 12:00 p.m. Reply, if any, shall be filed no later than 2/18/2015 at 12:00 p.m. The motion shall thereafter stand submitted. (Donati, J) Modified on 2/10/2015 (Owen, K).
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/5/2015 ORDERING that the 16 motion for contempt is CONTINUED for hearing on 2/25/2015 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom no. 24. Witness Stacy Madkins is directed to personally appear at the hearing and is cautioned that failure to appear may result in issuance of a warrant for her arrest. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on Stacy Madkins, 915 Waterford Ave., Stockton, CA 95206. Defense counsel is also directed to personally serve a copy of this order on Stacy Madkins. The 16 motion to compel is GRANTED. Witness Stacy Madkins shall appear for deposition on 2/13/2015 at 10:00 a.m. at Sherwood Executive Center, 5250 Claremont Avenue, Stockton, CA 95207. Th e witness is cautioned that failure to appear at the deposition may result in a citation of contempt and imposition of monetary sanctions. Defense counsel shall file a letter brief no later than 2/17/2015 advising the court whether the witness deposition was completed. Ruling on the motion for contempt and defendants' request for attorneys' fees and expenses is deferred pending completion of the deposition of Stacy Madkins. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 1/28/2015 GRANTING 17 Motion for Order Shortening Time; SETTING the Motion Hearing on 16 Motion to Compel for 2/4/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Del aney; ORDERING that any opposition be filed by 2/2/2015 at 12:00 PM; CAUTIONING non-party witness Stacey Madkins that a failure to file an opposition and appear at said hearing may result in an order of contempt and/or sanctions issued against her; DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to serve a copy of this order on Stacey Madkins, 915 Waterford Avenue, Stockton, CA 95206. (Michel, G.)
|
|
Filing
15
STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on December 1, 2014 re 14 . The Pre-Trial Scheduling Order is amended so that the parties shall make expert witness disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) by January 23, 2015 and that all discovery shall be completed by February 23, 2015. (Rivas, A)
|
|
Filing
13
STIPULATION and PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 12/18/13. (Kaminski, H)
|
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.
