Wright v. Grannis et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|September 26, 2014
ORDER Granting 173 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff's claim of deliberate indifference by prison officials in violation of his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment fails as a matter of l aw. Although Plaintiff presented a triable issue of fact on the subjective element as to Defendants Smith, Marrero, and Contreras, Plaintiff's failure to satisfy the objective element of his claim is determinative. Plaintiff also failed to est ablish a genuine issue of material fact with respect to supervisor liability. Thus, the evidence shows that no genuine issue of material fact exists, and Defendants are entitled to summary judgment. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 9/26/2014. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jao)
|July 16, 2013
ORDER Denying 124 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel must be denied at this time without prejudice. However, the Court notes that, pursuant to General Order 596 which adopted a Plan for the Representat ion of Pro se Litigants in Civil Cases, "the Court may appoint counsel for purposes of trial as a matter of course in each prisoner civil rights case where summary judgment has been denied." S.D. Cal. General Order No. 596. Accordingly, the Court informs Plaintiff that he may filed a renewed motion for appointment of counsel at an appropriate time prior to commencement of trial.Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 7/16/2013. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jao)
|March 12, 2012
ORDER: (1) ADOPTING 69 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and granting 58 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss; and (2) adopting 77 Report and Recommendation and denying 75 Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive Relief: Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Smith, Contreras, and Marrero are DISMISSED without prejudice. If Plaintiff wishes, he may file an amended complaint addressing the deficiencies noted herein within 45 days of the date that this Order is electronically docketed. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 3/12/12.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(lmt)
|March 14, 2011
ORDER: (1) ADOPTING 35 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; (2) granting in part and denying in part 24 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss; (3) granting 32 Plaintiff's Motion to Amend: Any amended complaint shall be file within 45 days of the date that this Order is electronically docketed. If no amended complaint is received by that time, the Clerk shall close the file. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 3/14/11.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(lmt)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?