Pobursky, et al. v. Madera County, et al.

Filing 184

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Order Commanding Attendance at Hearing 181 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 4/27/2010. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 JAMES S. POBURSKY, et al., 9 10 Plaintiffs, 11 v. 12 MADERA COUNTY, et al., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 action. On April 6, 2010, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations that Defendants' motion for involuntary dismissal be denied. Pursuant to Defendants' request, the Court set a status conference for April 28, 2010. On April 26, 2010, Plaintiff James Pobursky filed a third ex parte motion for an order commanding hearing attendance. He now contends that he is harassed and intimidated by the staff's monitoring of his phone usage and that he is being denied access to legal materials. He also argues that he missed "visual actions" during the hearing on Defendants' motion for involuntary dismissal. The Court discussed many of Plaintiff's concerns at the prior hearing. He presents nothing in the current motion that would change this Court's previous denial of his request. Insofar as Plaintiff contends that he missed visual cues that would have changed how he handled 1 Plaintiffs James S. and Wanda Pobursky ("Plaintiffs") are proceeding pro se in this Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:07cv0611 AWI DLB ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE MOTION FOR ORDER COMMANDING ATTENDANCE AT HEARING (Document 181) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 his opposition, the Court notes that it has recommended that Defendants' motion be denied. Nor is there any indication that Plaintiff was prohibited from effectively communicating his position at the hearing. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion to compel personal attendance is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 3b142a April 27, 2010 /s/ Dennis L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?