Nishimoto v. County of San Diego et al
Plaintiff: Rochelle Nishimoto
Defendant: County of, San Diego and Does 1-100
Case Number: 3:2016cv01974
Filed: August 5, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Office: San Diego Office
County: San Diego
Presiding Judge: Jan M. Adler
Presiding Judge: Roger T. Benitez
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
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
January 31, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 176 ORDER on 170 Plaintiff's Motion to Retax Costs. Plaintiffs motion is GRANTED as to her alternative request for a stay and DENIED without prejudice to her re-filing her motion to re-tax costs after the appeal has concluded.Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 1/30/2020. (mme)
April 29, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 169 ORDER Awarding Reasonable Attorneys' Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 4/29/2019.(anh)
April 10, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 163 ORDER RE: Sanctions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 4/10/2019.(anh)
March 22, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 155 ORDER (1) Granting Defendant Brantman's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 86 ]; (2) Denying Motions to Seal [Docs. 82 , 93 , 107 ]. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 3/22/2019. (anh)
March 18, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 153 ORDER Granting in Part Defendant Correctional Physicians Medical Group, Inc.'s Motion for Sanctions for Violation of the Protective Order [ECF. No. 132 ]. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez on 132. (anh)
March 11, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 151 ORDER Denying In Part Plaintiff's Motion: (1) For Reconsideration; and (2)For Leave to Add Three CPMG Officials [Doc. No. [119)]. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 3/11/2019. (anh)
September 10, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 72 ORDER Denying Defendant Anne Brantman's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 59 ]. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 9/10/2018. (anh)
June 15, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 51 ORDER Granting 49 Motion to File Third Amended Complaint; and Denying 42 as Moot Defendant Anne Brantman's Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs shall file their Third Amended Complaint within three (3) days of the date of this Order. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 6/15/18. (dlg)
June 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER Denying Defendant's 11 Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 6/20/2017. (knb)
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: Nishimoto v. County of San Diego 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: Rochelle Nishimoto
Represented By: Christopher S Morris
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: County of, San Diego
Represented By: Ricky R 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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Does 1-100
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?