Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-00826/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-00826-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TYRONE ADAMS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-11-0826 GEB CKD PS

vs.

CHARLES EASLEY, et al., ORDER

Defendants.

 /

 Defendants’ motions to dismiss and motion for sanctions came on regularly for

hearing January 25, 2012. Plaintiff Tyrone Adams, who is proceeding pro se, appeared on his

own behalf. Derek Haynes appeared on behalf of defendants Sutter County, Boyer, Cagle,

Bagley (“Sutter” defendants). Matthew Day appeared on behalf of the defendants moving to

dismiss (“Easley” defendants). Plaintiff submitted additional documents at the hearing. Upon

review of the documents in support and opposition, upon hearing the arguments of plaintiff and

counsel, and good cause appearing therefor, THE COURT FINDS AND ORDERS AS

FOLLOWS:

1. No later than February 9, 2012, defense counsel for the parties moving for

sanctions shall submit a supplemental declaration regarding any additional fees which have been

incurred subsequent to the filing of the motion for sanctions and detailed billing reflecting time

Case 2:11-cv-00826-GEB-CKD Document 101 Filed 01/27/12 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

spent on various tasks; defendants shall also submit declarations from other public entity defense

attorneys supporting the claimed hourly rates.

2. No later than February 16, 2012, plaintiff may file a five page document

responding to the supplemental declarations. The motion for sanctions will thereafter stand

submitted.

3. The court will issue findings and recommendations on the motions to dismiss

in conjunction with the findings and recommendations to be issued on the motion for sanctions.

4. Plaintiff’s motion to stay (dkt. no. 91) is denied.

5. Plaintiff has requested the undersigned recuse herself from this action. The

court finds that recusal is not warranted under any of the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 455.

6. The January 4, 2012 order limiting plaintiff’s pleadings is modified. In

addition to the pleadings allowed in that order, due to the death of defendant Trefcer, plaintiff

may file a motion to substitute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25.

Dated: January 26, 2012

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4

adams3.oah

2

Case 2:11-cv-00826-GEB-CKD Document 101 Filed 01/27/12 Page 2 of 2