Ellis v. Brady et al
| Clyde Reginald Ellis |
| Brady, San Diego Sheriff's Office and Does 1-7 |
| 3:2016cv01419 |
| June 9, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| Imperial |
| William Q. Hayes |
| Nita L. Stormes |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
37
ORDER: The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 36 ) is Adopted in its entirety. It is further Ordered that the motion for summary judgment filed by Officer Brady (ECF No. 19 ) is Granted and the claims against Doe Defendants are dismissed. The Court d eclines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims. The Clerk is Ordered to enter judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff and to close the case. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 02/01/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(ajs)
|
|
Filing
33
ORDER Requiring Supplemental Briefing Re Motion For Summary Judgment On Behalf Of Defendant Derrick Brady: Defendant is ordered to provide supplemental briefing on or before 11/1/2017. Plaintiff may file a supplemental opposition by 11/15/2017 and Defendant's reply, if any, is due by 11/22/2017. The Court then will take the matter under submission. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nita L. Stormes on 10/17/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc)
|
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 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.
