Beeman v. Cruz et al
| Linda Beeman |
| John B. Cruz, Amador County Sheriff's Department and County of Amador |
| 2:2021cv01774 |
| September 27, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Deborah Barnes |
| William B Shubb |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 MOTION to DISMISS by County of Amador, John B. Cruz. Attorney Whitesides, John A. added. Motion Hearing set for 1/24/2022 at 01:30 PM before Senior Judge William B. Shubb. (Attachments: #1 Points and Authorities, #2 Request for Judicial Notice and Exhibits A to E)(Whitesides, John) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; Initial Scheduling Conference SET for 2/14/2022 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 5 (WBS) before Senior Judge William B. Shubb. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Amador County Sheriff's Department, County of Amador, John B. Cruz* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Kenneth M. Foley* *Law Office Of Kenneth M. Foley* *37 N. Main Street* *San Andreas, CA 95249*. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by Linda Beeman. Attorney Foley, Kenneth M. added. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-9841489) (Foley, Kenneth) |
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.
