The Estate of Bryan Carreno, et al v. County of Santa Barbara, et al
| DUSTIN WINEBRENNER, Deputy, individually, ROBERT DEBARGE, Deputy, individually, JOSHUA COCKRELL, Senior Deputy, individually, COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, DOES, 1-30, inclusive, SANTA BARBARA COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE, SHANE MOORE, Deputy, individually, BILL BROWN, Sheriff of Santa Barbara County, individually and in his official capacity and KENNETH RUSHING, Deputy, individually |
| THE ESTATE OF BRYAN CARRENO, STELLA CARRENO, A. C., by her Guardian Ad Litem Ashley Meza, individually and as successor in interest to The Estrate of Bryan Carreno and NICHOLAS CARRENO |
| 20-55185 |
| February 21, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 19, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 Filed order (Deputy Clerk: LK) Appellants motion (Docket Entry No. [ # 4 ]) for voluntary dismissal is granted. This appeal is dismissed. See Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). This order served on the district court shall act as and for the mandate of this court. [11635024] (JPD) [Entered: 03/19/2020 09:47 AM] |
| Filing 4 Filed (ECF) Appellants A. C., Nicholas Carreno, Stella Carreno and The Estate of Bryan Carreno Motion to dismiss case voluntarily pursuant to FRAP 42(b). Date of service: 03/18/2020. [11633715]--[COURT ENTERED FILING to correct entry [3].] (SLM) [Entered: 03/18/2020 11:08 AM] |
| Filing 3 COURT DELETED INCORRECT ENTRY. Notice about deletion sent to case participants registered for electronic filing. Correct Entry: [ # 4 ]. Original Text: Filed (ECF) Appellants A. C., Nicholas Carreno, Stella Carreno and The Estate of Bryan Carreno reply to response to Court order dated 02/27/2020. Date of service: 03/18/2020. [11633640] [20-55185] (Schmidt, William) [Entered: 03/18/2020 10:47 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: LCC): A review of the record suggests that this court may lack jurisdiction over the appeal because the order challenged in the appeal may not be final or appealable. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Chacon v. Babcock, 640 F.2d 221, 222 (9th Cir. 1981) (order is not appealable unless it disposes of all claims as to all parties or judgment is entered in compliance with rule). Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellants shall move for voluntary dismissal of the appeal or show cause why it should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. If appellants elect to show cause, a response may be filed within 10 days after service of the memorandum. If appellants do not comply with this order, the Clerk shall dismiss this appeal pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1. [11611791] (JPD) [Entered: 02/27/2020 04:26 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellants A. C., Nicholas Carreno, Stella Carreno and The Estate of Bryan Carreno Mediation Questionnaire due on 02/28/2020. Appellants A. C., Nicholas Carreno, Stella Carreno and The Estate of Bryan Carreno opening brief due 04/22/2020. Appellees Bill Brown, Joshua Cockrell, County of Santa Barbara, Robert DeBarge, Does, Shane Moore, Kenneth Rushing, Santa Barbara County Sheriffs Office and Dustin Winebrenner answering brief due 05/22/2020. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11605393] (RT) [Entered: 02/21/2020 04:40 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
