Williams v. City of San Francisco et al
| Theophany Williams |
| City of San Francisco, George Gasson, City of San Francisco Chief of Police, Joseph Siragusa and Michael Evans |
| 4:2010cv02650 |
| June 16, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Oakland Office |
| San Francisco |
| Laurel Beeler |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Both |
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
28
SECOND ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE DISMISSAL BY APRIL 1, 2011. Signed by Judge Beeler on 3/1/2011. (lblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2011)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER VACATING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND ORDERING PLAINTIFF TO FILE DISMISSAL BY MARCH 4, 2011. Signed by Judge Beeler on 2/2/2011. (lblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/2/2011)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER Granting 22 Individual Defendants' Request to Excuse Personal Attendance at Settlement Conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward M. Chen on 1/21/2011. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/21/2011)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER GRANTING 14 Stipulation, filed by City of San Francisco, George Gasson, Theophany Williams, Michael Evans, Joseph Siragusa. Signed by Judge Beeler on 9/15/10. (lblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/15/2010)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO FILE CONSENT/DECLINATION FORM. Signed by Judge Beeler on 8/24/10. (lblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/25/2010)
|
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.
