Bell v. Duffy, et al.
| Danny Bell |
| Brian Duffy and A. Payan |
| 2:2014cv00965 |
| April 18, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| Garland E. Burrell |
| 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
79
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 03/17/16 disregarding 76 Motion to Amend the Complaint and proposed fifth amended complaint. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER signed by District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 1/7/2016 DENYING 68 Motion for Reconsideration construed as a Motion for Relief from Judgment pursuant to F.R.Cv.P. Rule 60(b). (Michel, G.)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 9/4/2015 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 55 are ADOPTED in FULL; Plaintiff's 44 motion to file a fourth amended complaint is DENIED with respect to his request to add his previously dismissed claims challenging the allegedly erroneous restitution order; Plaintiff's motion to file a fourth amended complaint alleging erroneous entries in his criminal record is denied for the reasons discussed in this order. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 09/02/15 ORDERING that plaintiff's motion for summary judgment 47 and defendants' motion to strike 48 are vacated. Also, RECOMMENDING that defendants' motion for summary judgment 53 be granted. MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT 53 referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/23/15 ORDERING that plaintiffs motion to file a fourth amended complaint (ECF No. 44 ) to add defendants Shaffer and Woodford as defendants with respect to his cla im challenging the calculation of filing fees is denied without prejudice; the court will issue further orders regarding these proposed new defendants following resolution of defendants summary judgment motion, if appropriate; It is RECOMMENDED that plaintiffs motion to file a fourth amended complaint (ECF No. 44 ) be denied with respect to his request to add his previously dismissed claims challenging the allegedly erroneous restitution order. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 5/1/2015 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 41 are ADOPTED in full; Defendants' 32 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED; and Defendants shall file a response to plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint within 20 days of the service of this order. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/6/2015 DENYING plaintiff's 34 motion for appointment of counsel; DENYING, as unnecessary, plaintiff's 35 motion for an extension of time to file an amended complaint; and DENYING plaintiff's request to proceed on the proposed third amended complaint and proposed supplemental third amended complaint; AND RECOMMENDING that defendants' 32 motion to dismiss be denied; defendants be ordered to file a response to plaintiff's second amended complaint within 20 days of the adoption of these findings and recommendations. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER ADOPTING 29 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, in full, signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 2/5/2015. Plaintiff's 25 Motion to file a Second Amended Complaint is DENIED with respect to his claim alleging improper withdrawal of money to pay restitution and GRANTED with respect to plaintiff's claim challenging defendants calculation of filing fee payments. Defendants shall file a Response to plaintiff's claim challenging defendants' calculation of filing fee payments within 20 days of date of this Order. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/29/2014 VACATING defendants' 18 motion to dismiss; and DENYING, as unnecessary, plaintiff's 19 motion for extension of time; and RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's 25 motion to file a second amended complaint be denied with respect to his claim alleging improper withdrawal of money to pay restitution; and the motion to file the second amended complaint be granted with respect to plaintiff's claim challenging defendants' calculation of filing fee payments. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 7/30/14 ADOPTING IN FULL 10 Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiff's claims alleging defendants improperly processed his administrative appeals and improperly charged plaintiff two filing fees, contained in 1 Petition are DISMISSED. (Meuleman, A)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 5/28/2014 DENYING plaintiff's 11 Motion to Disqualify or Recuse Judge. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Danny Bell signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 05/08/14. CDC is to collect payments from plaintiff's account and forward to the clerk until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full. Clerk to serve this order and a copy of plaintiff's IFP on the Director of CDC. Clerk to also serve Financial with a copy of this order. (cc: CDC Director and Financial)(Plummer, 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.
