Jackson v. Aviles et al
Plaintiff: Duwayne Jackson
Defendant: G. Mendoza and C. Osgood
Case Number: 3:2018cv00060
Filed: January 8, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Office: San Diego Office
County: San Diego
Presiding Judge: Cynthia Bashant
Presiding Judge: Barbara Lynn Major
Nature of Suit: 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
July 26, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 62 ORDER granting Defendant T. Fink's 41 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying Plaintiff's 44 Motion for Summary Judgment. Court overrules Plaintiff's Objection 61 and approves in part and adopts in part 56 Report and Recommenda tion. Defendant Fink is dismissed without prejudice. This case will otherwise proceed to trial on Plaintiff's remaining claims against Defendants F. Aviles, G. Mendoza, and C. Osgood. Plaintiff submitted a renewed motion for appointment of couns el. Court advises Plaintiff that an order on his renewed motion is forthcoming. All remaining pre-trial and trial dates remain vacated until further order. Signed by Judge Cynthia Bashant on 7/26/2019. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (jah)
May 28, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 56 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FOR ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT FINKS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ECF No. 41 AND FOR ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFSMOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ECF No. 44 : Objections to R&R due by 6/28/2019 and Replies due by 7/19/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara Lynn Major on 5/28/2019.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(sjm)
January 18, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER granting in part Plaintiff's 28 Motion to Compel Discovery and 23 Motion for Discovery. Plaintiff's motion to compel further response to Requests for Production Nos. 1, 4, and 5 us denied. Plaintiff's motion to compel further response to Request for Production No. 7 is granted. Defendant Avila must supplement his response by 2/8/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara Lynn Major on 1/18/2019. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (jah)
October 18, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER denying Plaintiff's 21 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Because Plaintiff has not alleged the requisite "exceptional circumstances", Court denies without prejudice Plaintiff's request for appointment of counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara Lynn Major on 10/18/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (jah)
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: Jackson v. Aviles 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: Duwayne Jackson
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: G. Mendoza
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: C. Osgood
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?