Brye v. City of Stockton
| Shawn Brye |
| City of Stockton |
| 2:2023cv00343 |
| February 23, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Kimberly J Mueller |
| Kendall J Newman |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 8, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy C. Schultz for Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 3/29/2023: Defendant's Proposed Substitution of Attorney, ECF No. #7 , is GRANTED. Accordingly, Attorney Mark E. Berry is SUBSTITUTED as counsel of record for Defendant City of Stockton in place of Attorney Bo Delange.(Text Only Entry) (Schultz, C) |
| Filing 8 CONSENT/DECLINE of U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1), this document is restricted to attorneys and court staff only. Judges do not have access to view this document and will be informed of a party's response only if all parties have consented to the referral. (Berry, Mark) |
| Filing 7 SUBSTITUTION of ATTORNEY - PROPOSED, submitted by City of Stockton. (Berry, Mark) |
| Filing 6 MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy C. Schultz for Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 3/22/2023: On the court's own motion, the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference set for 7/13/2023 is ADVANCED to 5/11/2023 at 2:30 PM before Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller, with the filing of a Joint Status Report due fourteen (14) days prior. The May hearing will proceed by video conferencing through the Zoom application. The Courtroom Deputy will provide counsel with the hearing access information no less than 24 hours before the hearing. (Text Only Entry) (Schultz, C) |
| Filing 5 ANSWER with Jury Demand by City of Stockton. Attorney Delange, Bo added.(Delange, Bo) |
| Filing 4 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; Initial Scheduling Conference set for 7/13/2023 at 02:30 PM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. (Attachments: #1 Standing Order, #2 Consent Form, #3 VDRP) (Kastilahn, A) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *City of Stockton* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Stanley Goff* *15 Boardman Place* *San Francisco, CA 94103*. (Kastilahn, A) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Shawn Brye (Goff, Stanley) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Defendant by Shawn Brye. Attorney Goff, Stanley added. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-10714834) |
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
| Search for this case: Brye v. City of Stockton | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Shawn Brye | |
| Represented By: | Stanley Goff |
| 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: City of Stockton | |
| Represented By: | Mark Emmett Berry |
| Represented By: | Bo Delange |
| 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.
