Davies v. DelaVega et.al.
Petitioner: Avon Davies
Respondent: M. Delavega
Case Number: 2:2014cv02831
Filed: December 4, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Solano
Presiding Judge: Carolyn K. Delaney
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 24, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 107 ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 8/24/18: The findings and recommendations 101 are ADOPTED in full. All defendants and claims other than a claim arising under the Eighth Amendment against defendant Crosson are DISMISSED. Defendant Crosson's motion for summary judgment 73 is GRANTED. Defendant Crosson is DISMISSED from this action. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. (Kaminski, H)
June 12, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 101 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 6/12/2018 VACATING 40 Order dismissing all defendants other than Crosson and RECOMMENDING all defendants and claims other than a claim arising under the Eighth Amendment against defendant Crosson be dismissed, 73 Motion for Summary Judgment be granted, defendant Crosson be dismissed from this action, and this case be closed. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
September 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 92 ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 9/20/17 ORDERING that the findings and recommendations filed June 30, 2017 72 , are ADOPTEDin full; and Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 62 is DENIED(Becknal, R)
July 14, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 77 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 7/13/2017 GRANTING 74 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff to file objections to the pending findings and recommendations by 8/11/2017. (Henshaw, R)
June 30, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 72 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 06/29/17 ORDERING plaintiff's motion for leave to file a fourth amended complaint is denied. The clerk of the court shall assign a district court judge to t his action. U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England Jr. randomly assigned to this action. Also, RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 62 be denied. MOTION for PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 62 referred to Judge Morrison C. England Jr. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
March 27, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 71 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/27/2017 and agreed between the parties. Plaintiff shall have until 4/15/2017 and Dr. Crosson shall have until 4/15/2017 to serve their responses to the first set of written discovery requests. Discover will close on 5/14/2017. All motions to compel must be filed by that date.(Yin, K)
November 14, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 58 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/14/16 denying 56 Motion for Reconsideration. (Plummer, M)
April 14, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 43 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/14/16 DENYING 41 Motion for Reconsideration. Plaintiff shall provide the documents described in the courts March 8, 2016 screening order within 21 days. Failure to provide those documents within 21 days will result in dismissal. (Dillon, M)
September 3, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 09/02/15 ordering plaintiff's 07/01/15 request for leave to supplement his pleadings 34 is denied. Plaintiff is granted 30 days within which to file a third amended complaint which complies with the terms of this order and the court's 03/17/15 screening order 25 . (Plummer, M)
March 17, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/17/15 ORDERING that Plaintiffs amended complaint is dismissed. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiffs motions for preliminary injunctive relief (ECF Nos. 22 & 23 ) are denied without prejudice to renewal after a defendant has been served with process. (Dillon, M)
December 17, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Avon Davies signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/17/2014. CDCR shall collect an initial partial filing fee and thereafter the balance in monthly payments and forward to t he Clerk until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full. The Clerk is directed to serve this order and copy of plaintiff's IFP on the Director of CDCR. The Clerk shall also serve Financial with a copy of this order. (cc: CDCR, Financial)(Yin, K)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Davies v. DelaVega et.al.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Avon Davies
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: M. Delavega
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?