Isbell v. State of Oklahoma, Department of Human Services et al
| Sarah Isbell |
| State of Oklahoma, Department of Human Services, State of California, Department of Child Support Services, Jim Hutchinson, Director Of Oklahoma Department of Human Services and Alisha Griffin, Director of California Department of Child Support Services |
| 1:2018cv00269 |
| January 11, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Eureka Office |
| Humboldt |
| Robert M. Illman |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
85
ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL by Judge William Alsup [granting 78 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis]. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/11/2018)
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER RE MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS FILED BY PLAINTIFF [re 51 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply MOTION to Appoint Counsel MOTION for Leave to File filed by Sarah Isbell]. Reply due by 6/22/2018. Response due by 6/15/2018. Motion Hearing set for 7/5/2018 08:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 12, 19th Floor before Judge William Alsup. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 6/7/2018. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/7/2018)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER ADOPTING 17 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION by Judge William Alsup. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/12/2018)
|
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 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.
