Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

David Jerome Oliver Sr. et al v. Superior Court of the State of California For the County

February 4, 2013

DAVID JEROME OLIVER SR. ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF PLACER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS



ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This matter came before the court on February 1, 2013, for hearing of the motion to dismiss filed by defendant Placer County District Attorney's Office (Doc. No. 11) and the amended motion to consolidate filed by defendant Placer County Superior Court. (Doc. No. 15.) Andreas Garza, Esq. appeared telephonically for defendant Placer County Superior Court. Renju Jacob, Esq. appeared for defendant Placer County District Attorney's Office. Plaintiff David Jerome Oliver, Sr., appeared telephonically on his own behalf. Plaintiff Genesia Lei Aloha Oliver appeared telephonically on her own behalf. Plaintiff Chalise Monique Wilborn appeared on her own behalf and plaintiff Mary Estelle Oliver appeared on her own behalf.

Upon consideration of the parties' arguments on file and at the hearing, and for the reasons set forth in detail on the record, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant Placer County Superior Court's December 13, 2012 amended motion to consolidate (Doc. No. 15) is denied without prejudice;

2. Defendant Placer County Superior Court shall file a response to plaintiff's amended complaint within fourteen days;

3. Plaintiffs' January 14, 2013 amended motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 28) is denied without prejudice; and

4. The Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference previously set for March 15, 2013, is vacated.

Also, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Defendant Placer County District Attorney's Office November 27, 2012 unopposed motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 11) be granted.*fn1

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiffs may file written objections with the court. A document containing objections should be titled "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within seven days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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