Estate of Sherrano Stingley et al v. County of Sacramento et al
| Estate of Sherrano Stingley, Dymin Stingley, S. S. and Annette Hilburn |
| County of Sacramento, Sacramento County Sheriff's Department and Scott Jones |
| 2:2023cv00255 |
| February 9, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Allison Claire |
| Troy L Nunley |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 11, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy M. Krueger for District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 4/5/2023: On the Court's own motion, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. #12 ) is hereby SUBMITTED without oral argument. Accordingly, the hearing set for 5/4/2023 is VACATED. If the Court determines oral argument is necessary, it will be scheduled at a later date. Defendants may still file a reply brief in accordance with Local Rule 230(d). (TEXT ONLY ENTRY) (Krueger, M) |
| Filing 13 OPPOSITION by Estate of Sherrano Stingley, Annette Hilburn, S. S., Dymin Stingley to #12 Motion to Dismiss,. (Merin, Mark) |
| Filing 12 MOTION to DISMISS by County of Sacramento, Scott Jones, Sacramento County Sheriff's Department. Motion Hearing set for 5/4/2023 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2 (TLN) before District Judge Troy L. Nunley. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities)(Fessenden, Carl) |
| Filing 11 MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy M. Krueger for District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/13/2023 APPROVING the parties' Stipulation (ECF No. #10 ). Plaintiffs' Request for Entry of Default (ECF No. #9 ) is hereby WITHDRAWN, and Defendants' shall have until 3/28/2023 to respond to the Complaint. (TEXT ONLY ENTRY) (Krueger, M) |
| Filing 10 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint by Defendants. (Merin, Mark) Modified on 3/14/2023 (Mena-Sanchez, L). |
| Filing 9 [WITHDRAWN per MINUTE ORDER No. 11] REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT as to County of Sacramento, Scott Jones, Sacramento County Sheriff's Department by Dymin Stingley, Estate of Sherrano Stingley, S. S., Annette Hilburn. (Merin, Mark) Modified on 3/13/2023 (Krueger, M). |
| Filing 8 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: Scott Jones served on 2/14/2023, answer due 3/7/2023. (Merin, Mark) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: Sacramento County Sheriff's Department served on 2/14/2023, answer due 3/7/2023. (Merin, Mark) |
| Filing 6 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: County of Sacramento served on 2/15/2023, answer due 3/8/2023. (Merin, Mark) |
Filing 5
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 2/10/2023 GRANTING #4 Motion to Appoint ad Litem LaShawnda Broughton for plaintiff S.S. (Donati, J)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION to APPOINT GUARDIAN AD LITEM by S. S.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of LaShawnda Broughton, #2 Proposed Order)(Merin, Mark) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Benson, A.) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *County of Sacramento, Scott Jones, Sacramento County Sheriff's Department* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Mark E. Merin* *Law Office of Mark E. Merin* *1010 F Street, Suite 300* *Sacramento, CA 95814*. (Benson, A.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by All Plaintiffs. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-10691072) (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Dymin Stingley, #2 Declaration of LaShawnda Broughton, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Merin, Mark) |
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.
