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.

George H. Robinson v. D. G. Adams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 16, 2013

GEORGE H. ROBINSON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
D. G. ADAMS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Barbara A. McAuliffe United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT JESSE MARTINEZ'S REQUEST TO SUPPLEMENT HIS RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER ISSUED MAY 27, 2011 (ECF No. 169)

Plaintiff George H. Robinson ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on the complaint against Defendants David, Miranda, Melo, Garcia, Mendoza, Martinez and Masiel for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; against Defendants Adams and Ruiz for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants Martinez, David, Miranda and Garcia for assault and battery in violation of state law.

On May 27, 2011, the Court issued an order granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's motion to compel. As part of that order, the Court directed Defendants to "provide any and all documents in Defendants' personnel files of professional reprimands (including findings of policies and procedures violations, colleague complaints by other officers against Defendants, written findings and conclusions, and all documents relating to any review or evaluation of the job performance of each of the herein Defendants during his/her employment with CDCR, etc.) by supervisors of unnecessary use of excessive force while on the job." (ECF No. 109, p. 19.) Defense counsel was 2 directed to submit copies of such documents to the Court for in camera review. 3

On April 12, 2013, defense counsel informed the Court that responses were submitted on 4 behalf of Joe Martinez in June 2011. However, Joe Martinez is not a defendant in this action. Rather, 5 the proper defendant is Jesse Martinez. Defendants now move to supplement Defendant Martinez's 6 response to the May 27, 2011 court order, and to strike any documents related to Joe Martinez from 7 this action. Defendants request shall be granted. 8

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Defendant Martinez is GRANTED leave to supplement his response to the Court's May 27, 2011 order; and

2. Any documents related to Joe Martinez, a non-party, are STRICKEN from the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130516

© 1992-2013 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.