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.

Reyes v. Modesto

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


July 28, 2010

VICTORIA REYES; JOSE REYES, JR., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
JOSEPH MODESTO; DAVID JAKABOSKY; MICHELLE DAVIS-TATE; RICHARD WINTERS; AND NANCY MEUER DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiffs are proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis. On April 22, 2010, the undersigned dismissed plaintiffs' complaint without prejudice pursuant to the court's screening authority, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and granted plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days of the service of that order. (Dkt. No. 10.) Plaintiffs did not file a timely amended complaint.

Plaintiffs have had ongoing problems advising the court of their current address, but on July 22, 2010, plaintiffs filed a document including what amounts to a notice of change of address. (Dkt. No. 12.) In that same document, plaintiffs acknowledge that they were unable to meet the deadline to file an amended complaint and request leave to file an amended complaint.

Plaintiffs assert that they were unable to file a timely amended complaint because their previous attorney, Cyrus Zal,*fn1 withdrew from his representation of plaintiffs and failed to deliver to plaintiffs documents that plaintiffs state they needed to complete and file an amended pleading. It appears from plaintiffs' submission that Mr. Zal has now delivered to plaintiffs all of the documents that plaintiffs previously requested from him.

Based on the circumstances described in plaintiffs' submission, the undersigned will grant plaintiffs' request for leave to file an amended complaint. However, the undersigned will not grant plaintiffs' request that they be permitted an extension until "at least . . . next year" to file an amended pleading. Plaintiffs will be granted 60 days to file an amended complaint that conforms to the requirements stated in the court's screening order entered April 22, 2010.

In addition, plaintiffs request a referral to a legal clinic or other attorneys who may provide plaintiffs assistance in prosecuting their claims. The undersigned offers the following information. Plaintiffs are referred to the Office of Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of California,*fn2 which can provide plaintiffs a document entitled "Pro Se Package, A Simple Guide to Filing Civil Action." Plaintiffs may also consider visiting the Sacramento County Public Law Library,*fn3 which might be able to provide useful information. Plaintiffs may also consider contacting the following organizations: Legal Services of Northern California; and Voluntary Legal Services of Northern California.

For the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiffs' request for leave to file an amended complaint (Dkt. No. 12) is granted.

2. Plaintiffs shall have 60 days from the date of service of this order to file an amended complaint, as described in this court's order entered April 22, 2010 (Dkt. No. 10).


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.