Tunstall v. Duffy
| Robert Tunstall |
| Brian Duffy, S. Nowling, S. Bahadur, S. Lee, D. Britton, A. Avalos, E. Balano and K. Johnson |
| 2:2015cv00502 |
| March 6, 2015 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| San Joaquin |
| Dale A. Drozd |
| 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
26
ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/15/2015 DENYING without prejudice plaintiff's 24 motion for injunctive relief; DENYING without prejudice plaintiff's 21 , 22 requests for appointment of counsel ; and the Clerk shall appoint a district judge in this action; AND RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/7/15 ORDERING that plaintiffs March 20, 2015 and March 31, 2015 motions for the appointment of counsel (ECF Nos. 16 , 19 ) are denied. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/21/2015 DENYING without prejudice plaintiff's 7 request to proceed ifp; the Clerk shall send plaintiff an ifp application; and plaintiff shall submit, within 30 days, a properly completed ifp application. (Yin, K)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
