Giddens v. City of Suisun et al
| Richard Giddens |
| City of Suisun, Suisun City Council, Suzanne Bragdon, Suisun City Attorney, Suisun Police Department, Edmond Dashido, Tim Mattos, Andrew White and Michael Urlaub |
| 2:2014cv00943 |
| April 17, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Allison Claire |
| Lawrence K. Karlton |
| Other 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
124
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 12/8/2022 SETTING the Final pretrial order as follows in the Order. Each party is granted 14 days from the entry of this Final Pretrial Order to object to any part of the order or to request augmentation to it. (Perdue, C.)
|
|
Filing
116
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/23/2020 ORDERING plaintiff to file a status report no later than 2/5/2020, updating the court on the status of this case and proposing a case schedule for the resolution of all outstanding matters. If plaintiff fails to comply with this order, the case will be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
115
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/27/18 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 2/5/18 112 are ADOPTED in full; Public Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 107 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follo ws: (a) GRANTED as to Claims One (Fourth Amendment Unlawful Arrest), Four (First Amendment), Seven (Monell), Ten (False Arrest/False Imprisonment), and Fifteen (Unruh Civil Rights Act); (b) DENIED as to Claims Two (Fourth Amendment Excessive Force ), Nine (Assault and Battery), Thirteen (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress), and Fourteen (Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress) against Defendants Mattos and Urlaub; and The following Defendants Dadisho, White, Sanchez, Day, Hudson, the City of Suisun, the Suisun City Council, and the Suisun City Police Department are TERMINATED from this case. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
112
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/2/2018 RECOMMENDING that the public defendants' 107 Motion for Summary Judgment be granted in part and denied in part; Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections due within 21 days after being served with these F & R's. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
103
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/18/17 ORDERING that Plaintiff's MOTION for Default Judgment against defendant Bluford, 98 is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff may again move for default judgment when all other claims against other defendants have been fully a djudicated. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
102
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/5/2017 ORDERING the last day discovery motions will be heard is 10/18/2017; Discovery due by 11/1/2017; Dispositive Motions filed by 11/22/2017, last date for law and motion to be heard is 12/20/20 17; Joint Mid-Litigation Statement due by 10/18/2017; Joint Pretrial Statement by 2/8/2018; and Final Pretrial Conference is Reset for 2/22/2018 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2 (TLN) before District Judge Troy L. Nunley; all other dates set forth in the Court's Prior Scheduling Order 64 and Scheduling Amendment 82 will remain unchanged.(Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
97
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 7/14/17, ORDERING that Defendants' 83 Motion to Compel Mental Examination is GRANTED. Defendants request that plaintiff's "ADA Advocate" be barred from the exam room whi le the mental health examination is conducted is GRANTED. The Rule 35 examination will be audio recorded, using a device provided by either of the parties or by the examiner. Both parties will have equal access to or copies of the audio recording of the mental examination. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
91
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 7/6/2017 GRANTING 90 Request to Seal, the 85 Defendants Expert Disclosure is SEALED. Defendants shall IMMEDIATELY file an appropriately redacted version of the Expert Disclosure. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
82
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/26/2017 ORDERING that the requested extension of time for expert disclosure is GRANTED IN PART. The court's 64 scheduling order is MODIFIED to reflect: The last day for disclosure of expe rt witnesses is 6/30/2017; The last day for disclosure of rebuttal expert witnesses is 7/31/2017; All other portions of the Scheduling Order that address Expert Disclosures will remain unchanged; The last day discovery motions will be heard is 9/16/2017; Discovery will be completed by 9/30/2017; The Joint-Mid Litigation Statement is due by 9/16/2017; All other dates set forth in the court's Scheduling Order will remain unchanged. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
80
PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 3/27/2017. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
69
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/27/2017 DENYING 67 Motion for Default Judgment. The hearing on this motion, currently scheduled for 2/1/2017, is VACATED. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/21/2016 ORDERING the Clerk to STRIKE 59 Letter and DELETE it from the docket. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/19/16 DISCHARGING 57 Order to Show Cause. ORDERING Plaintiff's "ADA Assistant" may sit at counsel table to assist plaintiff at the status conference. The assistant shall not argue on plaintiff's behalf. Nor shall the assistant otherwise address the court, unless specifically requested by the court to do so.(Washington, S)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/17/16 ORDERING the Initial Scheduling Conference is CONTINUED to 11/9/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 26 (AC) before Magistrate Judge Allison Claire; and plaintiff is ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE, in writing by 10/26/16, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff may satisfy this OSC by filing his Status Report by 10/26/16. Alternatively, if plaintiff has no dispute with the Status Report filed by the City Defendants, he may file a statement joining that report by 10/26/16. (Benson, A)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/10/16 ORDERING that plaintiff's "Motion for Default Judgment" (ECF No. 52 ) is DENIED without prejudice to its renewal in proper form. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER adopting 46 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/22/16: Plaintiff's Motion to Amend 38 , is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part and the proposed Second Amended Complaint 39 , is DEEMED to be the operative complaint. Plaintiff is ordered to serve the Second Amended Complaint on Defendants Sanchez, Day and Hudson. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
46
AMENDED ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/4/16 ORDERING that the Clerk strike 42 the Third Amended Complaint from the docket. Plaintiff's 38 Motion To Amend, should be GRANTED in part an d DENIED in part, and the proposed 39 Second Amended Complaint should be DEEMED to be the operative complaint as detailed in this order. Matter referred to District Judge Troy L. Nunley. Within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court. (Kastilahn, A) Modified on 2/5/2016 (Kastilahn, A).
|
|
Filing
44
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 01/29/16 ORDERING 42 Third Amended Complaint STRICKEN. It is hereby RECOMMENDED (1) Plaintiffs 38 Motion to Amend is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and th e proposed 39 Second Amended Complaint is DEEMED the operative complaint, (2) GRANTING the Motion to Amend to add Defendants (other than Bragdon, Segala, Wilson and Taylor), (3) ORDERING Plaintiff to serve the Second Amended Complaint on Defendants Sanchez, Day and Hudson. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Jackson, T)
|
|
Filing
40
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/6/2015 ORDERING that, no later than 30 days from the date of this order, defendant shall file and serve an opposition, or a statement of non-opposition, to plaintiff's 38 motion to amend, treating the 39 Second Amended Complaint as the proposed amended complaint. Plaintiff shall file and serve his reply, if any, no later than 14 days from the date the opposition is filed. At that point, the matter will be taken under submission or scheduled for a hearing. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 4/23/2015 ADOPTING IN FULL 35 Findings and Recommendations; GRANTING 27 Motion to Dismiss as to the Equal Protection claim (Claim 3); DENYING 27 Motion to Dismiss as to the First Amendment claim (Claim 4); GRANTING 27 Motion to Dismiss as to the conspiracy claim (Claim 5); GRANTING 27 Motion to Dismiss as to the failure to prevent the conspiracy claim (Claim 6); DISMISSING WITH LEAVE TO AMEND Claims 3, 5, and 6; GRANTING 27 Motion to D ismiss as to the Separation of Powers claim (Claim 14); DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE Claim 14; INFORMING the plaintiff that leave to amend is limited to the claims specified; DIRECTING the plaintiff that an amendment to add new claims shall require leave of court pursuant to F.R.Cv.P. Rule 15(a)(2). (Michel, G.)
|
|
Filing
36
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/20/2015 GRANTING 29 Motion to Quash; QUASHING the subpoena issued on 12/22/2014 and served on 12/26/2014; NOTIFYING the moving non-parties that they have no obligation to comply with or further respond to said subpoena; VACATING the motion hearing on 29 Motion to Quash set for 2/25/2015. (Michel, G.)
|
|
Filing
35
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/17/15 recommending that Motion to Dismiss be granted in part and denied in part. F&R referred to Judge Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections to F&R due within twenty-one days. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/20/14 ORDERING that Plaintiff is GRANTED 30 days from the date of service of this order to file an amended complaint. Failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/17/2014 ADOPTING IN FULL 19 Findings and Recommendations; GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART 6 Motion to Dismiss. (Michel, G)
|
|
Filing
19
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, recommending defendants' 6 Motion to Dismiss 1 Complaint be granted in part and denied, signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/20/2014. These Findings and Recommendation are SUBMITTED to District Judge Troy L. Nunley. Within 14 days after being served with these Findings and Recommendatinos, any party may file written Objections with Court and serve a copy on all parties. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER ON REQUEST TO SEAL DOCUMENT(S) signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/19/14. The Plaintiff's 8 Request to Seal is DENIED. The Clerk of the Court will return the proposed sealed documents to the Plaintiff. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
15
STIPULATION and ORDER 12 permitting pro se party, Richard Giddens, to participate in litigation as an e-filer under Local Rule 133 signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/18/2014. (Marciel, M)
|
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.
