Jacobs v. Sullivan et al

Filing 127

ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT PROCEED TO TRIAL, EITHER CONTINUING TO STAY THE CASE AGAINST DEFENDANT CROTTY UNDER 11 U.S.C. ' 362(a), OR DISMISSING DEFENDANT CROTTY FROM THIS ACTION signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 7/4/2014. Show Cause Response due by 8/11/2014.(Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10

Plaintiff,

11
12

1:05-cv-01625-LJO-GSA-PC

GEORGE E. JACOBS IV,

ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW
CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT
PROCEED TO TRIAL, EITHER
CONTINUING TO STAY THE CASE
AGAINST DEFENDANT CROTTY UNDER
11 U.S.C. ' 362(a), OR DISMISSING
DEFENDANT CROTTY FROM THIS
ACTION

vs.
W. J. SULLIVAN, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE FOR
PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND TO THIS
ORDER

15
16
17

I.

BACKGROUND

18

Plaintiff George E. Jacobs IV (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

19

forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff submitted

20

the Complaint commencing this action on October 26, 2005. (See Doc. 1.) This action now

21

proceeds on the Third Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on May 5, 2010, against

22

defendants Crotty, Nelson, Watson, Chan, McGregor, Alexander, Carrasco, Blankenship, Jobb,

23

Granillo, Johnson, and Salazar aka Adams, for violation of Plaintiff=s rights under the Eighth

24

Amendment. (Doc. 29.)

25

Defendant Crotty has filed bankruptcy, and on June 23, 2011, the Court stayed the case

26

against defendant Crotty pursuant to 11 U.S.C. ' 362(a), pending resolution of the bankruptcy

27

proceedings. (Doc. 58.) On April 24, 2013, the court delayed scheduling the trial in this action

28

pending resolution of defendant Crotty’s bankruptcy proceedings. (Doc. 118.)
1

1

On June 30, 2014, Defendants filed a status report, notifying the court that defendant

2

Crotty’s bankruptcy is expected to last another two years. (Doc. 126.) Defendants argue that if

3

the case is stayed for another two years, this case will not be tried until more than ten years

4

after the events giving rise to this lawsuit, resulting in fading memories, Defendants retiring

5

and moving out of state, and loss of evidence. Defendants also argue that it does not appear

6

efficient to wait until defendant Crotty’s bankruptcy proceeding ends, because Plaintiff did not

7

file a claim with the bankruptcy court, any claims for money damages Plaintiff had against

8

defendant Crotty are or will be discharged, and Plaintiff will not be able to pursue his suit

9

against defendant Crotty.
In light of Defendants’ arguments and assertions, Plaintiff shall be required to show

10
11

cause why this case should not proceed to trial, either continuing to stay the case against

12

defendant Crotty under 11 U.S.C. ' 362(a), or dismissing defendant Crotty from this action.

13

II.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

14

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

15

1.

Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff is required to

16

file a written response to this order, showing cause why this case should not

17

proceed to trial, and either continuing to stay the case against defendant Crotty

18

only under 11 U.S.C. ' 362(a), or dismissing defendant Crotty altogether from

19

this action;

20

2.

ten days of the date of service of Plaintiff’s response; and

21
22

Any reply by Defendants to Plaintiff’s response shall be filed and served within

3.

23

Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order shall result in a recommendation that
this action be dismissed.

24
25
26
27

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 4, 2014

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
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
27
28
3