Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Taylor v. Jackson, 18-cv-04857-PJH. (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20190206a43 Visitors: 16
Filed: Feb. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 05, 2019
Summary: ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO REASSIGN CASE PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON , District Judge . Pro se plaintiff Dionn Novell Taylor, a detainee held in San Francisco County Jail #4, has filed an amended complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983 alleging that his housing unit has faulty plumbing pipes which cause the toilets to overflow and leaks from the ceiling which has led to his cell being flooded with sewage, and that several defendants were informed about the issue but have failed to take appropriate action. B
More

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO REASSIGN CASE

Pro se plaintiff Dionn Novell Taylor, a detainee held in San Francisco County Jail #4, has filed an amended complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that his housing unit has faulty plumbing pipes which cause the toilets to overflow and leaks from the ceiling which has led to his cell being flooded with sewage, and that several defendants were informed about the issue but have failed to take appropriate action. By order entered November 29, 2018, the court ordered service of the amended complaint on defendants Sergeant Miller, Sergeant Dolly and Captain Jackson. Dkt. no. 6. Defendants had not yet entered an appearance in this action but filed an administrative motion pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12 to consider whether this action is related to two later-filed actions assigned to Magistrate Judge Spero: Johnson, et al. v. City and County of San Francisco, et al., No. 18-cv-4890-JCS, and Zayas, et al. v. San Francisco County Sheriff's Dept., et al., No. 18-cv-6155-JCS. Defendants asserted in the administrative motion that this action was related to the Johnson and Zayas actions because all three cases arise out of plumbing issues at county jail #4 from January 2017 to the present and therefore concern substantially the same transaction, facts, issues and questions of law. Dkt. no. 10.

Defendants asked that the three cases be related and that the instant action, which was the lowest-numbered case, be reassigned to Magistrate Judge Spero. Defendants' motion was denied pursuant to the local rules as described in a prior court order. Dkt. No. 12. However, the court noted that even though the instant case was the lowest numbered case, the court would consider reassignment to Magistrate Judge Spero if plaintiff Dionn Novell Taylor filed a written consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge for all purposes, including entry of judgment. Dkt. No. 13. All parties have now consented to proceed before a Magistrate Judge. Dkt. Nos. 14, 16.

Accordingly, the clerk shall REASSIGN this case to Magistrate Judge Spero. The parties are instructed that all future filings in any reassigned case are to bear the initials of the newly assigned judge immediately after the case number. Any case management conference in any reassigned case will be rescheduled by the court. The parties shall adjust the dates for the conference, disclosures and report required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 and 26 accordingly. Unless otherwise ordered, any dates for hearing noticed motions are vacated and must be re-noticed by the moving party before the newly assigned judge; any deadlines set by the ADR Local Rules remain in effect; and any deadlines established in a case management order continue to govern, except dates for appearance in court, which will be rescheduled by the newly assigned judge.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer