Branagan v. Wall
| Thomas Branagan |
| Joseph Wall |
| 3:2017cv00485 |
| August 15, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Reno Office |
| Valerie P. Cooke |
| Miranda M. Du |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 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
56
ORDER - Judge Baldwin's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 49 ) is accepted and adopted in full. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 37 ) is granted. Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 1/12/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AB)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER - The Motion for Extension of Time (ECF No. 51 ) is granted. Any objection to the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 49 ) will be due fourteen (14) days after a ruling on the Motion for Medical Results (ECF No. 50 ) is issued. Defendant Joseph Wall shall file his response to the Motion for Medical Results (ECF No. 50 ) by October 22, 2020. Any reply shall be filed seven (7) days after the response is filed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin on 10/8/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AB)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER - Attorney Alan R. Erb, Esq. shall comply with the court's order (ECF No. 13 ) on or before Tuesday, January 22, 2019. If Mr. Erb fails to timely comply with this order, the court will issue an order to show cause why sanctions should not be issued for failure to follow the courts orders pursuant to LR IA 11-8(d). The Clerk shall MAIL a copy of this order via U.S. Postal Service to Alan R. Erb, Esq. at his address of record and to the plaintiff at the Northern Nev ada Correctional Center. If plaintiff has no objection to Mr. Erb's motion to withdraw, he shall file a notice of non-opposition to the motion with the court. ( Order mailed to Attorney Alan R. Erb, PO Box 133, Gardnerville, NV 89410, and to Tho mas Branagan at NNCC, on 1/11/2019.)Defendants' motion for enlargement of stay (ECF No. 15 ) is GRANTED. This matter will be STAYED an additional sixty (60) days following the court's order on Mr. Erb's motion to withdraw so the parties may continue settlement discussions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin Carry on 1/10/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER granting ECF No 9 Motion to Extend Time - Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Stay. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin Carry on 10/29/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
|
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
| Search for this case: Branagan v. Wall | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Thomas Branagan | |
| Represented By: | c/o Librarian |
| 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: Joseph Wall | |
| 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.
