Oblad v. Crowther et al
| Brian Oblad |
| Scott Crowther, Lori Smith, FNU Blavis and Med Technicians |
| 2:2017cv00102 |
| February 10, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Utah |
| Central Office |
| Salt Lake |
| Jill N. Parrish |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
106
MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER granting 86 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim ; denying 92 Motion ; denying 93 Motion for Hearing; denying 94 Motion ; finding as moot 95 Motion to Stay ; denying 100 Motion ; denying 101 Motion ; denying 103 Motion. With no controversy remaining in this Court, this action is CLOSED. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 9/23/2020. (nl)
|
|
Filing
76
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER re Service of Process. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 1/2/2020. (jds)
|
|
Filing
70
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER to show Cause Regarding Failure to Xure Deficient Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiff must within thirty days show cause why this case should not be dismissed because he has not, as required, cured the Se cond Amended Complaints deficiencies noted in order. If Plaintiff fails to timely cure the above deficiencies according to this Order's instructions, this action will be dismissed without further notice. Denying 68 Plaintiffs motion for stay and for the Court to transfer exhibits to the state court and to make exhibits available to him. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 8/5/2019. Clerks Office mailed Plaintiff the Pro Se Litigant Guide with a form civil-rights complaint.(jds)
|
|
Filing
65
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 62 Motion to Consolidate this case with another case, 2:17-CV-95 DB and ORDER to Cure Deficient Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiff must within thirty days cure the Second Amended Complaints deficiencies noted above. If Plaintiff fails to timely cure the above deficiencies according to this Order's instructions, this action will be dismissed without further notice. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 5/8/2019. (jds)
|
|
Filing
54
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER: denying 50 Third Motion to Appoint Counsel and denying 53 Fourth Motion to Appoint Counsel; for the same reasons stated in the prior order in this case denying appointment of voluntary pro bono counsel 48 . The Clerk of Court shall take note that no further motions for appointed counsel will be accepted by the Court. Denying 52 Plaintiffs motion for discovery and depositions. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 7/3/2018. (jds)
|
|
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER: granting 43 Plaintiff's motion for permission to amend his Complaint. Plaintiff shall file his amended complaint within thirty days. All other of Plaintiffs motions in this case are DENIED. Denying 42 Motion ; denying 45 Motion for Hearing; denying 46 Motion for Extension of Time; denying 47 Motion for Extension of Time; denying 5 Motion ; denying 7 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; denying 7 Motion ; denying 8 Motion for Hearing; denying 9 Motion ; denying 9 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; denying 30 Motion in Limine; denying 33 Motion ; denying 34 Motion to Dismiss Party. ; denying 35 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 37 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 38 Motion for Declaratory Judgment; denying 38 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying 39 Motion for Extension of Time. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 1/3/2018. (jds)
|
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 Utah 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.
