Dicey v. Cobb et al
| Berlan Lynell Dicey |
| T. Cobb, L. Betti, R. Hood, C. Gleen and D. Griffith |
| 2:2014cv02661 |
| November 14, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Carolyn K. Delaney |
| 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
80
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 5/23/2018 GRANTING 75 Motion for Enforcement of Settlement Agreement and DENYING Defendants' Motion for Sanctions. Plaintiff to deliver to defendants all documents necessary to effec tuate all the terms of settlement in these cases within 30 days. Defendants to file a stipulation of dismissal within 60 days unless Plaintiff fails to provide defendants with a signed stipulation of dismissal, in which case defendants to inform the court. (Henshaw, R)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 8/28/2017 DENYING plaintiff's 73 motion to reject the settlement and GRANTING plaintiff an additional 21 days to sign all dispositional documents, including the stipulation of dismissal. Counsel for defendants shall file the stipulation for dismissal within 30 days. If defendants do not obtain the required documents for dismissal from plaintiff within 21 days, defendants may move for enforcement of the settlement agreement, and any other sanctions appropriate under the law. (cc: KJN)(Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
69
ORDER adopting in part 64 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/31/17. Defendants Betti and Hood's 29 motion for summary judgment is DENIED as follows: A. DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's remaining claim against Defendant Hood; and B. DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's remaining claim against Defendant Betti. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
64
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 1/13/2017 RECOMMENDING defendants Betti and Hood's 29 motion for summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part as follows: (1) Granted with respect t o plaintiff's remaining claim against defendant Hood, resulting in defendant Hood's dismissal from this action; and (2) Denied with respect to plaintiff's remaining claim against defendant Betti. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/10/17 ORDERING that Plaintiff's MOTION for Reconsideration 59 is DENIED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
58
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/5/2016 RECOMMENDING defendant Griffith's 20 motion for summary judgment be granted; and defendant Griffith be dismissed from this action. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/01/16 ordering plaintiff's 8/09/16 motion to compel 45 is denied. The sur-replies filed by plaintiff on 8/22/16 46 and 9/06/16 49 are stricken. Plaintiff's 9/22/16 motion for sanctions 53 is denied. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 6/27/16 DENYING 36 Motion for the reopening of discovery. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 6/19/16 ORDERING that Plaintiff's 33 motion for reconsideration is denied. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 04/12/16 ordering that within 30 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion for summary judgment or a statement of non-opposition. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/16/16 ORDERING that 21 Motion for Extension is GRANTED in the following respects: The discovery deadline is extended from March 20 to April 20, 2016. If plaintiff wishes to serve additio nal requests for discovery, he must, before the expiration of the discovery deadline, seek leave to do so indicating what discovery requests he wishes to serve, why, and why the requests were not served prior to the expiration of the January 20, 2016 deadline for serving discovery requests. In all other respects, the March 14, 2016 motion is DENIED.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/12/15 ORDERING the Director of the CDC to collect and forward payment from the trust account of Berlan Lynell Dicey and forward payment to the court until the b alance is paid in full. Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order and a copy of plaintiff's signed in forma pauperis affidavit to the Director of the CDC; and the Clerk of the Court is further directed to serve a copy of this order on the Financial Department of the court. (cc CDC, Financial)(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/20/14 ORDERING that Plaintiff shall submit, within 30 days from the date of this order, a completed affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis on the form provided by the Clerk of Court; The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner; and Plaintiff shall submit, within 30 days from the date of this order, a certified copy of his prison trust account statement for the six month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.(Dillon, 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.
