Cooks v. California State Prison et al.
| Charles R. Cooks |
| California State Prison, Eric Arnold, Moss, C. Ventura, Linda Gumathotho and C. Cagnina |
| 2:2017cv00049 |
| January 9, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Carolyn K. Delaney |
| John A. Mendez |
| 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
21
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/04/17 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
19
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 10/23/2017 STRIKING 18 First Amended Complaint and GRANTING Plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint. (Henshaw, R)
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Charles R. Cooks signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 4/5/2017. CDCR shall collect an initial partial filing fee and thereafter the balance in monthly payments and forward t o the 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)
|
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.
