Medina v. Kernan, 1:19-cv-00345-DAD-JLT. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190320996
Visitors: 26
Filed: Mar. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 19, 2019
Summary: ORDER RECLASSIFYING CASE JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . The events set forth in the complaint arose while the plaintiff was in custody and it raises claims related to the plaintiff's conditions of confinement. The defendants in this action include government employees and the State of California. Therefore, the Court ORDERS the matter to be reclassified as a "prisoner action." Despite this, however, the requirements of Local Rules 230(1), 240(c)(8) and 271(a)(2) SHALL NOT apply
Summary: ORDER RECLASSIFYING CASE JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . The events set forth in the complaint arose while the plaintiff was in custody and it raises claims related to the plaintiff's conditions of confinement. The defendants in this action include government employees and the State of California. Therefore, the Court ORDERS the matter to be reclassified as a "prisoner action." Despite this, however, the requirements of Local Rules 230(1), 240(c)(8) and 271(a)(2) SHALL NOT apply...
More
ORDER RECLASSIFYING CASE
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
The events set forth in the complaint arose while the plaintiff was in custody and it raises claims related to the plaintiff's conditions of confinement. The defendants in this action include government employees and the State of California. Therefore, the Court ORDERS the matter to be reclassified as a "prisoner action." Despite this, however, the requirements of Local Rules 230(1), 240(c)(8) and 271(a)(2) SHALL NOT apply.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
