Kuzmicki v. Hanrahan et al
| Stanley Kuzmicki |
| Brandon Gardner, David Hanrahan, Samantha Hanrahan, Sgt. Shelly and Warren R. Westad |
| 3:2017cv00342 |
| May 31, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Reno Office |
| Valerie P. Cooke |
| Robert C. Jones |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28:1983 Civil Rights |
| None |
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
24
ORDER that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 22 ) is adopted and accepted; this case is dismissed without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to file a second amended Complaint; Clerk directed to enter judgment and close this case. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 5/22/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER the Magistrate Judges Report and Recommendation ECF No. 12 is ADOPTED AND ACCEPTED; plaintiff's claims against Sergeant Shelly is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claims against David Hanraha n, Samantha Hanrahan, and Warren Westad are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; plaintiff's remaining claims against David Hanrahan, Samantha Hanrahan, and Warren Westad are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; plaintiff's motion for extension of time to file a second amended complaint ECF No. 15 is GRANTED; plaintiff to file a second amended complaint before 8/30/2018. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 7/25/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
|
|
Filing
12
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that plaintiff's claims against Sergeant Shelly be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment due process and equal protection claims against David Hanrahan, Samantha Hanrahan, and Warren Wes tad be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; remaining claims against David Hanrahan, Samantha Hanrahan, and Warren Westad be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff file a second amended complaint remedying defects by 06/03/2018. Objections to R&R due by 5/18/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke on 5/4/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER that the Court ADOPTS AND ACCEPTS the Report and Recommendations of the U.S. Magistrate Judge ECF No. 3 ; granting ECF No. 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; Clerk directed to file Plaintiff's C omplaint ECF No. 1 -1; Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND as to Defendants Shelly, S. Hanrahan, D. Hanrahan and Westad and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to Defendant Gardner; granting ECF No. 4 Motion to Extend Tim e to file amended complaint; amended complaint due by 11/27/2017; ECF No. 5 Motion for Appointment of Public Defendant ECF No. 5 is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 10/27/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
|
|
Filing
3
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that Plaintiff's Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis ECF No. 1 ; Clerk FILED Plaintiff's Complaint ECF No. 1 -1; the complaint be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND< /B> as to claims against defendant Shelly, S. Hanrahan, D. Hanrahan, and Westad; the complaint be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to claims against Defendant Gardner.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff file an amended complaint remedying the defects identified in order by 10/11/2017. Objections to R&R due by 9/25/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke on 09/11/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
|
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 Nevada 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.
