Thomas v. Razo, et al.

Filing 96

ORDER Granting Defendants' Request Regarding Attendance of Witnesses signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 02/19/2015. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 ROBERT THOMAS, 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 1:10cv02173 AWI DLB PC ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST REGARDING ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES 12 J. RAZO, et al., (Document 94-1) 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Plaintiff Robert Thomas (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendants Razo, Moreno, Brown, Vera, Vasquez and Holguin. Trial is set for February 24, 2015. On February 17, 2015, Defendants filed objections to the Court’s February 9, 2015 pre-trial order. As part of their objections, Defendants proposed the following schedule for the attendance of witnesses: *Day One (February 24, 2015) - All parties are present, and the testimony of Plaintiff and Defendants Razo, Moreno, Brown, Vasquez, Holguin and Vera will be presented. *Day Two (February 25, 2015) - Nurse Kimble and/or Nurse Roberts, Officer J. Cardenas, Officer C. Nelson, Officer M. Nicholson, Retired Counselor D. Chapman and Counselor Lopez, will appear at 8:30 28 1 1 a.m., to testify in the morning (and throughout the day), and expert 2 Robert Borg will appear at 1:00 p.m., to testify in the afternoon if 3 needed. 4 *Day Three (February 26, 2015) - Any witnesses remaining from Day Two 5 will testify. 6 Defendants’ request is GRANTED. Defendants shall ensure that their witnesses are 7 available pursuant to the above schedule. 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 19, 2015 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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?