Friedman v. Jenkins, et al
Plaintiff: Jack Arne Friedman
Defendant: Brooke Jenkins, District Attorney, City and County of San Francisco, City and County of San Francisco and Brooke Jenkins
Case Number: 4:2023cv05036
Filed: October 2, 2023
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Presiding Judge: Donna M Ryu
Referring Judge: Jeffrey S White
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 19, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 6, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 22 REPLY (re #17 MOTION to Dismiss COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6) AND MOTION TO STRIKE PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(f) ) filed byBrooke Jenkins. (Frenzen, Amy) (Filed on 12/6/2023)
November 29, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 21 OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re #17 MOTION to Dismiss COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6) AND MOTION TO STRIKE PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(f) ) filed byJack Arne Friedman. (Beladi, Sara) (Filed on 11/29/2023)
November 21, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 20 Renotice motion hearing re #17 MOTION to Dismiss COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6) AND MOTION TO STRIKE PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(f) filed byBrooke Jenkins. (Related document(s) #17 ) (Frenzen, Amy) (Filed on 11/21/2023)
November 21, 2023 Opinion or Order Reset Hearing as to #17 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) and Motion to Strike Pursant to FRCP 12(f). Motion Hearing set for 1/26/2024 09:00 AM before Judge Jeffrey S. White - Videoconference Only. (kkp, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2023)
November 16, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Jeffrey S. White for all further proceedings. Judge Charles R. Breyer no longer assigned to case, Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras.. Signed by Clerk on 11/16/2023. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(ark, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2023)
November 16, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER OF RECUSAL. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 11/16/2023. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2023)
November 15, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 17 MOTION to Dismiss COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6) AND MOTION TO STRIKE PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(f) filed by Brooke Jenkins. Motion to Dismiss Hearing set for 1/26/2024 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 06, 17th Floor. Responses due by 11/29/2023. Replies due by 12/6/2023. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Frenzen, Amy) (Filed on 11/15/2023)
November 15, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ANSWER to Complaint by City and County of San Francisco. (Frenzen, Amy) (Filed on 11/15/2023)
November 2, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 15 CLERK'S NOTICE: A Joint Case Management Statement due by 2/16/2024. Initial Case Management Conference set for 2/23/2024 at 8:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 06, 17th Floor. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2023)
November 2, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Charles R. Breyer for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu no longer assigned to case. Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Signed by Clerk on 11/2/2023. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(jml, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2023)
November 1, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 13 CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/1/2023)
November 1, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 12 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by City and County of San Francisco, Brooke Jenkins.. (Frenzen, Amy) (Filed on 11/1/2023)
November 1, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 11 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DUE DATE OF DEFENDANTS RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT filed by City and County of San Francisco, Brooke Jenkins. (Frenzen, Amy) (Filed on 11/1/2023)
October 30, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 10 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Jack Arne Friedman. Brooke Jenkins served on 10/28/2023, answer due 11/20/2023. (Siegel, Dan) (Filed on 10/30/2023)
October 27, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Jack Arne Friedman. City and County of San Francisco served on 10/11/2023, answer due 11/1/2023. (Siegel, Dan) (Filed on 10/27/2023)
October 18, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 8 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Jack Arne Friedman.. (Beladi, Sara) (Filed on 10/18/2023)
October 18, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ERRONEOUSLY E-FILED, DISREGARD - SEE DOC #8 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Jack Arne Friedman.. (Beladi, Sara) (Filed on 10/18/2023) Modified on 10/18/2023 (far, COURT STAFF).
October 17, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 6 CLERK'S NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiff shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge. Note that any party is free to withhold consent to proceed before a magistrate judge without adverse substantive consequences. The forms are available at: #http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. Consent/Declination due by 10/31/2023. (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/17/2023)
October 3, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 5 Summons Issued as to City and County of San Francisco, Brooke Jenkins. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/3/2023)
October 3, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 4 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: This case may fall within the Initial Discovery Protocols for Employment Cases Alleging Adverse Action. See #General Order 71. Parties and Counsel are directed to review General Order 71 to determine whether it applies to this case, and to comply with that General Order if applicable. Case Management Statement due by 12/27/2023. Initial Case Management Conference set for 1/3/2024 01:30 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 4, 3rd Floor. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/3/2023)
October 2, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 10/16/2023. (sec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/2/2023)
October 2, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 2 Proposed Summons. (Siegel, Dan) (Filed on 10/2/2023)
October 2, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES against City and County of San Francisco, Brooke Jenkins, District Attorney, City and County of San Francisco ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACANDC-18697259.). Filed byJack Arne Friedman. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Siegel, Dan) (Filed on 10/2/2023)

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: Friedman v. Jenkins, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jack Arne Friedman
Represented By: Dan Siegel
Represented By: Alan Sunmin Yee
Represented By: Sara Beladi
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: Brooke Jenkins, District Attorney, City and County of San Francisco
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 and County of San Francisco
Represented By: Amy Pizzo Frenzen
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: Brooke Jenkins
Represented By: Amy Pizzo Frenzen
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?