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.

Carlos Quiroz v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 6, 2011

CARLOS QUIROZ,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L.Beck United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR TRANSPORT OF OTHER PRISONERS(DOC. 60) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE AND MODIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER (DOC. 62)

Plaintiff Carlos Quiroz ("Plaintiff") is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendants Shen and Attygalla for violation of the Eighth Amendment. The matter is currently set for jury trial.

Pending before the Court is: 1) Plaintiff's motion requesting transport of two other prisoners to trial, filed December 27, 2010, and 2) Defendants' motion to amend the scheduling order and continue the trial, filed January 4, 2011.

I. Plaintiff's Motion

Plaintiff moves for the Court to allow two inmates, Gabriel Santiago and Edward Chapin, to be transported to court for trial. Doc. 60. Plaintiff contends that these inmates will assist Plaintiff with the proceedings, as Mr. Santiago speaks both Spanish and English, and Mr. Chapin has a better understanding of the law than Plaintiff.

Defendants filed an opposition to this motion on December 30, 2010. Doc. 61.

Defendants contend that there is no legal authority in support of Plaintiff's request.

Defendants are correct. Mr. Santiago and Mr. Chapin have nothing to do with this action. Plaintiff has no right to inmate assistants during trial. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is denied.

II. Defendants' Motion

Defendant Shen contends that he is currently in Taiwan acting as the primary caregiver for his sick mother. Defendant Shen contends that his mother's condition has become grave and that she will not live for much longer. Defendants request that the Court continue the trial until August 2011.

Modification of the Court's scheduling order requires a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). Good cause having been presented, the Court HEREBY GRANTS Defendants' motion to amend the scheduling order and continue the trial until August 2011. The Court will, by separate order, set a new schedule for trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20110106

© 1992-2011 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.