Hines v. California Public Utilities Commission
Plaintiff: Donna Hines
Defendant: California Public Utilities Commission
Case Number: 3:2010cv02813
Filed: June 28, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: San Francisco Office
County: San Francisco
Presiding Judge: Edward M. Chen
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 21, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 120 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 103 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2011)
August 1, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 89 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Denying 88 Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis on Appeal. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/1/2011)
June 8, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 77 CIVIL STANDING ORDER for U.S. District Judge Edward M. Chen. (slh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/8/2011)
May 25, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 76 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 57 Defendants Peevey, Lindh, and Abhulimen's Motion to Dismiss. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/25/2011)
May 13, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 74 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Re 73 Plaintiff's Motion for Enlargement of Time. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2011)
April 5, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 68 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Re 44 Defendant California Public Utilities Commission's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint and to Strike Punitive Damages. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/5/2011)
February 28, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 48 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Denying 47 Plaintiff's Motion for a More Definite Statement; Denying 47 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike; Denying 47 Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment; and Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Enlargment of Time. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/28/2011)
February 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Denying 38 Plaintiff's "Expedited Motion for Interim Remedies and Economic Relief." (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/23/2011)
January 27, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 41 ORDER Setting Briefing Schedule for 38 Plaintiff's "Expedited Motion for Interim Remedies and Economic Relief." Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 1/27/2011. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/27/2011)
November 24, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 19 Motion to Substitute and Amend and 28 Request to File Correction. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/24/2010)
November 8, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 9 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Strike. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/8/2010)
July 27, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 4 SUA SPONTE REFERRAL ORDER. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/27/10. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/27/2010)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hines v. California Public Utilities Commission
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Donna Hines
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: California Public Utilities Commission
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.


Why Is My Information Online?