Payne, et al v. City of Sacramento, et al
| Rufus Jefferson, Harriett Jefferson and Reginald Rafe Nicholas Payne |
| City of Sacramento and D. Mower |
| 2:2020cv02364 |
| November 25, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Troy L Nunley |
| Jeremy D Peterson |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 24, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 NOTICE of APPEARANCE by Joseph A. Nicholson on behalf of Harriett Jefferson, Rufus Jefferson, Reginald Rafe Nicholas Payne. Attorney Nicholson, Joseph A. added. (Nicholson, Joseph) |
| Filing 5 ANSWER with Jury Demand by City of Sacramento, D. Mower. Attorney Trimm, Chance Louis added.(Trimm, Chance) |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: City of Sacramento served on 12/9/2020. (Baghdadi, Khaldoun) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Tupolo, A) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *City of Sacramento, D. Mower* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Khaldoun Baghdadi* *Walkup Melodia* *650 California Street, 26th Floor* *San Francisco, CA 94108*. (Tupolo, A) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by All Plaintiffs. (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0972-9267185) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Baghdadi, Khaldoun) |
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 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.
