Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Daniels v. California Dep't of Corrections and Rehabilitation

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 11, 2010

YVETTE DANIELS, MARIA AGUILAR AND KAREN CURRIE, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL PERSONS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge

ORDER

The court has received a Notice of Related Cases from Plaintiff's counsel in the above-captioned matter asking that it be related to another matter pending in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, entitled Berndt, et a., v. CDCR. et al., U.S. District Court Case No. 03-3174 VRW. The Notice of Related Cases purports to be made under the auspices of Eastern District Local Rule 123. Rule 123, however, applies only to cases pending in the Eastern District; here, the case for which relation is sought is pending in another district altogether, the Northern District of California.

Moreover, even if Rule 123 did apply, the Judge with the oldest case would ordinarily decide whether relation should be effect. See E.D. Local Rule 123(c). Here, because the Northern District Action was filed in 2003 and the action pending in this District was not filed until 2010, the decision should not be made by the undersigned in any event.

The result would not change even were this Court to address the merits. The present matter appears to involve harassment through inmate possession of pornographic materials at juvenile institutions, whereas the Berndt case alleges harassment by virtue of indecent exposure by inmates at adult institutions. Despite some similarities, the cases do not appear similar enough to effect, through relation, a substantial savings of judicial effort or other economies.

This order is issued for informational purposes only, and shall have no effect on the status of either this case or the case pending before the Northern District.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100611

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.