Rojas v. Brown, 1:17-cv-01514-DAD-JLT. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190320980
Visitors: 4
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 plaintiffs were in custody and it raises claims related to the plaintiffs' 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 app
Summary: ORDER RECLASSIFYING CASE JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . The events set forth in the complaint arose while the plaintiffs were in custody and it raises claims related to the plaintiffs' 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 appl..
More
ORDER RECLASSIFYING CASE
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
The events set forth in the complaint arose while the plaintiffs were in custody and it raises claims related to the plaintiffs' 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
