Goldson v. David
Plaintiff: Rodney Goldson
Defendant: Clarene David
Case Number: 4:2013cv00403
Filed: January 29, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: Oakland Office
County: Marin
Presiding Judge: PSLC AGB
Presiding Judge: Phyllis J. Hamilton
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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
March 18, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in favor of David. Goldson's motion to continue the matter is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 03/18/2014. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/18/2014)
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: Goldson v. David
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rodney Goldson
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: Clarene David
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?