Watkins v. Murphy
| James Watkins |
| D Murphy |
| 2:2017cv01041 |
| May 17, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| San Diego |
| Allison Claire |
| John A. Mendez |
| 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
99
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/9/2019 DISCHARGING the 96 order to show cause filed 11/20/2019. The Clerk shall (a) File ECF No. 97 under seal and so designate it on the docket; (b) Separately file and re-number ECF No. 98 - 1, and entitle it Plaintiff's Corrected Pretrial Statement. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
96
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/19/19 ORDERING plaintiff shall, within 14 days after the filing date of this order, file and serve a statement showing cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed due to plaintiffs failure to comply with court orders. If plaintiff seeks to continue to pursue this case, he shall also file and serve his Pretrial Statement. Alternatively, plaintiff may request the voluntary dismissal of this case without prejudice. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
94
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/28/19 ORDERING plaintiff shall, on or before Friday, November 15, 2019, file and serve his PretrialStatement in this case, OR a statement requesting voluntary dismissal of his action. No further extensions of time will be granted. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
92
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/07/19 GRANTING 91 Application for Extension of Time. Defendants deadline to file his separate pretrial statement is extended 14 days, from October 4, 2019, up to and including October 18, 2019. If plaintiff has not already mailed his pretrial statement, this extension of time shall also apply to plaintiff. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 7/9/2019 ORDERING: After reviewing the parties' statements, the district judge has directed the undersigned to inform the parties that trial will commence on 4/6/2020, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom No. 6. ORDERING: that on or before 10/4/2019, the parties shall file and serve separate pretrial statements that fully address each of the matters set forth in Local Rule 281(b); no exhibits shall be submitted at this time. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
78
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/5/2019 ORDERING parties to file separate statements, as described in this Order, within 14 days after the filing date of this order. (Henshaw, R)
|
|
Filing
77
ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 6/3/2019 ADOPTED in FULL 66 Findings and Recommendations. DENYING 28 Motion for Summary Judgment, and this case shall proceed to trial on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against defendant Murphy. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
76
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/29/2019 DENYING without prejudice 70 Motion for Appointment of Counsel; DENYING as moot 72 Motion to Compel; DENYING as frivolous and vexatious 74 Motion for Sanctions; and ADMONISHING Plaintiff to refrain from filing further matters in this case until so directed by the court. (Henshaw, R)
|
|
Filing
66
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/17/2019 RECOMMENDING 28 Motion for Summary Judgment be denied and this case proceed to trial on Plaintiff's 8th Amendment excessive force claim against defendant Murphy. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/3/18 GRANTING 58 Motion for Extended Time and DENYING 59 Motion to Appoint Counsel without prejudice. 62 Reply to Response to Motion is DEEMED timely. Defendant may file and serve a surreply within 14 days after the filing of plaintiff's reply. (Coll, A)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER AND WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS AD TESTIFICANDUM ISSUED signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/2/2018 ORDERING the custodian to produce James Watkins #H-50916, to testify at CSP, Sacramento at 9:00 a.m. on 1/15/2019, before a federal Magistrate Judge; custodian is ordered to notify the court of any change in custody of this inmate and is ordered to provide the new custodian with a copy of this writ. (cc: OTCD-SAC; ADR) (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/24/2018 ORDERING plaintiff's 44 request to lodge video evidence is GRANTED; the copy of the video of plaintiff's post-incident interview lodged in this court on 10/2/2018 has been p laced in the court's vault. Plaintiff's 39 motion for injunctive relief, construed as a motion to compel disclosure of defendant's 12/2/2016 document entitled "Institutional Executive Review Committee (IERC) Critique and Qual itative Evaluation,' withheld based on the "official information" privilege, is GRANTED in part. Defendant shall promptly provide a copy of the subject document in accordance with this order. Plaintiff shall, within 28 days, file and serve a reply to defendant's 36 opposition to plaintiff's original 28 motion for summary judgment; defendant may, but need not, file and serve a surreply within 14 days after the filing of plaintiff's reply. Plaintiff's 50 motion for sanctions and 51 motion for court order are DENIED as frivolous. Plaintiff is ADMONISHED to refrain from filing further frivolous motions in this case. (See Order for Details) (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/19/2018 SUSTAINING defense counsel's 42 objections and GRANTING counsel's 42 motion to modify; the August 30 and 31, 2018 verifications of the HDSP Litigation Coordinator (McConnel l) and defense counsel, see ECF Nos. 45 -2 at 4- 5, are to fully satisfy the court's August 22, 2018 order, ECF No. 38 ; DENYING as moot plaintiff's 47 motion to compel discovery; DISREGARDING as duplicative, plaintiff's [41 ] motion for summary judgment; GRANTING plaintiff's 44 request to lodge a CD containing a videotape of plaintiff's post-incident interview; Defense counsel is directed to obtain a copy of the CD and, within 14 days after the filing da te of this order, to identify and lodge the CD in this case in accordance with the Local Rules, and to clearly indicate on the CD that it should immediately be delivered to the undersigned's chambers; DISREGARDING plaintiff's 40 motion for judicial notice, which is virtually identical to his motion for injunctive relief filed the same day. The court will defer ruling on plaintiff's 39 motion for injunctive relief. Defense counsel shall, within 14 days, submit to this court , for in camera review, the subject privilege log and withheld documents responsive to plaintiff's Request for Production No. 3. The court will later set a deadline for plaintiff to file a reply to defendant's opposition to plaintiff's original motion for summary judgment and, if appropriate to permit defendant to file a surreply. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
38
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 8/21/2018 GRANTING in part plaintiff's 33 motion to compel discovery. Within 14 days, defendant and his counsel shall serve plaintiff with a verification signed under penalty of perjury b y both defendant and his counsel, that a reasonable and diligent search has been conducted to locate all documents, videotapes and other materials responsive to plaintiff's Request for Production Nos. One and Four, but there exist no responsive materials. Plaintiff's 32 motion for sanctions is DENIED. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/26/2018 ORDERING plaintiff's 24 "brief" filed 4/23/2018 shall remain on the docket but will be DISREGARDED.(Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/24/18 DISREGARDING 21 plaintiff's discovery request. Plaintiff must serve this discovery request on defendant's counsel. Plaintiff's motion to obtain the attendance of an incarcerated witness 22 is DENIED. Plaintiff's second motion for appointment of counsel 23 is DENIED. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of James Watkins signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/20/2017. CDCR shall collect an initial partial filing fee and thereafter the balance in monthly payments and forward to 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
| Search for this case: Watkins v. Murphy | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: James Watkins | |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: D Murphy | |
| 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.
