Mitchell v. Sacramento City Unified School District

Filing 42

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/22/2012 ORDERING 36 that plaintiff's motion to compel is DENIED without prejudice due to counsel's failure to comply with Local Rule 251(c). (Reader, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 EKIN MITCHELL, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-11-0362 LKK DAD v. SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, 14 ORDER Defendant. 15 / 16 This matter came before the court on February 10, 2012, for hearing of plaintiff’s 17 motion to compel production of documents. Aldon L. Bolanos, Esq. appeared for plaintiff Ekin 18 Mitchell. Gloria Godinez, Esq. appeared for defendant Sacramento City Unified School District. 19 Upon consideration of the parties’ arguments on file and at the hearing, and for 20 the reasons set forth in detail on the record, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to 21 compel (Doc. No. 36) is denied without prejudice due to counsel’s failure to comply with Local 22 Rule 251(c). 23 DATED: February 22, 2012. 24 25 DAD:6 Ddad1\orders.civil\mitchell0362.oah.021012 26 1

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?