Goolsby v. Ridge et al

Plaintiff: Thomas Goolsby
Defendant: Neal Ridge, M Martinez, A Sanchez and C Wilson
Case Number: 3:2009cv02654
Filed: November 23, 2009
Court: California Southern District Court
Office: San Diego Office
County: Kern
Referring Judge: Ruben B. Brooks
Presiding Judge: William Q. Hayes
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 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 29, 2012 39 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER (1) Granting In Part And Denying In Part Defendants' Motion To Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 29 ); And (2) Denying Plaintiff's Motion For Order On Defendants Motion To Dismiss As Moot (Doc. 38 ): The Court does not have jurisdiction over the personnel at Goolsby's current prison and his request for injunctive relief is dismissed. Defendants' answer to the Second Amended Complaint must be filed no later than 4/23/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruben B. Brooks on 3/29/2012. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc)
May 23, 2011 23 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER Granting Defendants' Motion To Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Re Doc. 13 ): This Order supercedes the Report and Recommendation issued on 5/10/2011 (Doc. 20 ). Defendant Wilson's Motion to Dismiss count two of the Amended Complaint for Plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies is granted without leave to amend. Goolsby's allegations against Wilson in count three are sua sponte dismissed without leave to amend. Defendants Ridge and Marti nez's Motion to Dismiss the Eighth Amendment charges against them in count one for failing to personally examine Goolsby and failing to prescribe the medications Plaintiff preferred is granted without leave to amend for failure to state a claim. Further, Ridge and Martinez's Motion to Dismiss these two claims based on qualified immunity is granted without leave to amend. Their Motion to Dismiss the claim alleging that Ridge and Martinez failed to ensure that Goolsby underwent the diagn ostic tests ordered by treating physicians at county jail is granted with leave to amend. Defendants' claim of qualified immunity for this claim is premature. Finally, Goolsby's request for injunctive relief is moot and is denied. Plaintiff is granted 45 days leave from the date this Order is filed in which to file a Second Amended Complaint which cures all the deficiencies of pleading the claim in count one against Drs. Ridge and Martinez that they failed to ensure that Goolsby underwent the diagnostic tests ordered by physicians at county jail as noted. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruben B. Brooks on 5/23/2011. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc)
August 26, 2010 11 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion For Appointment Of Counsel (Re Doc. 8 ): Plaintiff's motion is denied without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Ruben B. Brooks on 8/25/2010. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc)
April 28, 2010 6 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER Directing U.S. Marshal To Effect Service Of First Amended Complaint Pursuant To Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c)(3) And 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(d). Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 4/27/2010. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service; IFP package mailed on 4/29/2010; per Order, copies of IFP Order (Doc. 4 ) were included in the package.) (mdc) (jrl).
March 9, 2010 4 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER (1) Granting Motion To Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Imposing No Initial Partial Filing Fee And Garnishing Balance From Prisoner's Trust Account (Re Doc. 2 ) And (2) Sua Sponte Dismissing Complaint For Failing To State A Claim Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. Sections 1915(e)(2) And 1915A(b): Plaintiff is granted 45 days leave from the date this Order is filed in which to file a First Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 3/9/2010. (Order electronically transmitted to Matthew Cate, Secretary CDCR; all non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc) (kaj).

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

Search for this case: Goolsby v. Ridge et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Thomas Goolsby
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Neal Ridge
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: M Martinez
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: A Sanchez
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: C Wilson
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 [ 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?