Gilliam

Gilliam v. O'Neill

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 27, 20201:19-cv-01711California907 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM JESSE GILLIAM, Case No. 1:19-cv-01711-DAD-SAB 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CORRECT PARTY NAME SPELLING v. ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS BARBARA HOPE O’NEILL, et al., BUDDY MENDES’ AND BRIAN PACHECO’S REQUESTS FOR Defendants. EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS

(ECF Nos. 12, 13)

17 I. BACKGROUND William Jesse Gilliam (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Barbara Hope O’Neill, the County of Fresno, Phil Larson, Susan B. Anderson, Henry R. Perea, Judy Case McNairy, Deporah Poochigian, Andreas Boregas, Buddy Mendez,1 Brian Pacheco, Ken Taniguchi, and Elizabeth Diaz (“Defendants”) based on delays in bringing him to trial on allegations that he was a sexually…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.