Ibarra v. Snohomish County et al
Plaintiff: Pete Ibarra, III
Defendant: Snohomish County, Kathy Marino and James Simoneschi
Case Number: 2:2016cv00317
Filed: March 3, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Washington
Office: Seattle Office
County: Snohomish
Presiding Judge: Brian A Tsuchida
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
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
April 25, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 63 ORDER by Judge James L. Robart denying as moot Plaintiff's 61 Motion for Extension of Time. (PM)
April 5, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 60 STIPULATION AND ORDER OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(l)(A)(ii) of case without prejudice. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM)
April 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER denying Defendants' 43 Second Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM)
March 30, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 53 ORDER granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff Pete Ibarra III's 52 motion to extend the time to retain counsel and to reopen discovery. Mr. Ibarra has until May 1, 2017 to retain counsel. The court denies Mr. Ibarra's motion to reopen discovery. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM) cc: Plaintiff via the USPS
March 23, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 51 ORDER regarding Plaintiff's voicemail messages left with the Clerk's Office regarding an extension of time to retain new counsel after his attorney's withdrawal (see 3/22/17 Min. Entry (Dkt. # 50 )) and an opportunity to redo his phys ician's deposition. The court will not consider oral requests made via voicemail message; rather, Mr. Ibarra must make requests for relief in writing on the court's docket. The court directs Mr. Ibarra to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Civil Rules for the Western District of Washington for instruction on filing motions seeking relief from the court. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM) cc: Plaintiff via the USPS and email
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 Washington Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ibarra v. Snohomish County 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: Pete Ibarra, III
Represented By: Darryl Parker
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: Snohomish County
Represented By: Marc Bides
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: Kathy Marino
Represented By: Marc Bides
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: James Simoneschi
Represented By: Marc Bides
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?