Cook, et al. v. City of Fairfield, et al.
| Billy Robert Cook, Michael John Maroulas and Becky Smisek-Gage |
| City of Fairfield, Walt Tibbet, Rebecca Belk, Aaron Bertsch, Frank Piro, Kelly Rombach, Mark Apley, Adam Brunie, Christopher Grimm and Keith Pulsipher |
| 2:2015cv02339 |
| November 12, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| Garland E. Burrell |
| 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
77
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/18/2018 ORDERING that this case is DISMISSED in its entirety with prejudice pursuant to the parties' stipulation. CASE CLOSED. (Fabillaran, J)
|
|
Filing
72
FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/7/18. The parties may file written oppositions to the motions in limine by 12 noon on 6/15/18. A final, court-convened settlement conference is SET before Magistrate Judge Caro lyn K. Delaney on 6/13/18, at 9:00 a.m. The parties should be prepared to begin trial on 6/18/18, and be on call for trial to begin at any time beginning on 6/18/18, 9 a.m. through 6/29/18 at 5 p.m. The parties shall file any proposed jury voir dire by noon on 6/15/18. The parties shall file any joint set of jury instructions by noon on 6/15/18. Counsel shall e-mail a copy of all proposed jury instructions and verdicts no later than noon on 6/15/18. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
69
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 06/05/18 ORDERING that instead of serving Rebecca Belk, Aaron Bertsch, Frank Piro, Kelly Rombach, Adam Brunie, Christopher Grimm, and Keither Pulsipher with trial subpoenas to com pel their testimony in Plaintiffs' case in chief at trial in this case, Plaintiffs may compel their attendance and testimony at trial by reasonable phone notice of 24 hours or more to Defendants' counsel. Defendant Walt Tibbet is DISMISSED with prejudice; each side to bear their own fees and costs. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
50
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 12/12/2017 ORDERING the Dispositive Motions deadline is EXTENDED to 4/20/2017. (Washington, S)
|
|
Filing
47
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/20/2017. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
45
STIPULATION and ORDER FOR PRESENTATION OF GOVERNMENT CLAIMS signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/16/2017. (Washington, S)
|
|
Filing
43
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 09/26/17 ORDERING that the Discovery deadline is EXTENDED to 04/13/17. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/25/17, GRANTING defendant's 27 motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claim of direct negligence against the City, and DENYING defendants' 27 motion as to all remaining claims, inclu ding plaintiffs' negligence claim against the City based on a theory of vicarious liability. The court GRANTS plaintiffs' request for leave to amend and DIRECTS plaintiffs to file any fourth amended complaint within 21 days of the date of this order. (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
35
STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/13/16: Designation of Expert Witnesses due by 10/16/2017. Discovery due by 11/10/2017. Dispositive Motions shall be heard no later than 1/12/2018. Final Pret rial Conference set for 5/4/2018 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Jury Trial set for 6/18/2018 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Case Referred to VDRP. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
23
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 5/18/16. The court GRANTS the parties' stipulation to file a third amended complaint nunc pro tunc (ECF No. 22 ). Plaintiff shall file and serve their third Amended Complaint no later than 6/24/2016. The City of Fairfield and all individual defendants represented by Bertrand, Fox, Elliot, Osman & Wenzel shall have until 7/15/2016 to respond to Plaintiffs' third amended complaint. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 4/7/2016 ORDERING 17 City of Fairfield's Motion to Dismiss, is WITHDRAWN and the hearing currently set for 4/22/2016, is VACATED; Plaintiffs shall file and serve an amended complaint no later than 4/22/2016; City of Fairfield and all individual defendants represented by Bertrand, Fox, Elliot, Osman & Wenzel shall have until 5/13/2016, to respond to plaintiffs' amended complaint. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 01/04/16 ORDERING that, pursuant to 7 Amended Stipulation, the Initial Scheduling Conference is RESET for 3/14/2016 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. with a join t status report due 14 days prior. Further, plaintiffs are notified under Rule 4(m) of the FRCP that failure to serve Defendants Tibbet, Belk, Bertsch, Piro, Rombach, Apley, Brunie, Grimm, and Pulsipher with process within the time period prescribed in that Rule may result in the unserved defendant(s) being dismissed. To avoid dismissal, by 03/28/16, plaintiffs shall file proof of service for these defendants or a sufficient explanation why service was not completed within Rule 4(m)'s prescribed service period.(Benson, A)
|
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.
