Jerry Cox, et al. v. Mariposa County, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

§ JERRY COX, et al., § § Plaintiffs, § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 19-1105 § MARIPOSA COUNTY, et al., § § Defendants. § § §

ORDER

After reviewing the parties’ motions for summary judgment, the court has determined that supplemental briefing will aid in its resolution of the issues presented in them. Harris’s motion for summary judgment presents the question when the plaintiffs’ claims based on the receivership proceedings accrued. (See Docket Entry No. 215 at 10). This raises the question whether such claims accrued at all, because the state-court proceedings did not terminate in the plaintiffs’ favor. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 484–90 (1994). The parties must submit by January 23, 2026, a brief of no more than 12 pages addressing the following issues, broadly concerning whether Heck bars the plaintiffs’ claims arising out of the receivership proceedings: First, whether Heck applies to prior civil suits. See, e.g., Hall v. Porfert, 2023 WL 6274833, at *1 (11th Cir. Sept. 26, 2023) (per curiam); Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136,…