Allen v. Superior Court of California County of Sacramento et al.

Filing 29

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/19/2017 DISMISSING the 10 Third Amended Complaint against CG Services. (Michel, G.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CRAIG D. ALLEN,

No. 2:16-cv-0214 MCE GGH

12
Plaintiff,

13

ORDER
v.

14
15
16

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO,
SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF
DEPARTMENT,and CG SERVICES,

17

Defendants.

18
The court held a hearing on defendant GC1 Services Motion to Dismiss the Complaint.

19
20

Plaintiff, who is prosecuting pro se, appeared for plaintiff and attorney Renee Ohlendorf appeared

21

on behalf of GC Services. The basis of the Motion was that GC service was simply an entity to

22

which plaintiff’s criminal fine debt had been referred, but that no charging allegations had been

23

made against this entity aside from the mere fact of referral.

24

It was disclosed in the course of the hearing that GC Services is a private contract

25

collection entity that performs services for the Sacramento County Superior Court upon request.

26

However, it was further disclosed that GC’s responsibility for collection in connection with funds

27
28

1

It was made clear at the hearing that name CF Services, which appears in the caption, is a
misnomer for GC Services.
1

1

allegedly owed the superior court by plaintiff has been terminated, and the Superior Court is now

2

responsible for any further activities regarding the criminal fine, et al. owed.

3
4
5

In light of the foregoing the parties stipulated on the record that GC Services would be
dismissed from the action without objection.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Complaint against GC Services is dismissed.

6

ECF # 21 is resolved.

7

Dated: January 19, 2017

8

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2