Gilliam

Gilliam v. O'Neill

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 17, 20201:19-cv-01711California1,559 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM JESSE GILLIAM, Case No. 1:19-cv-01711-DAD-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE

COURT TO ISSUE CORRECTED

v. SUMMONS FOR DEFENDANTS

BARBARA HOPE O’NEILL, HENRY R.

BARBARA HOPE O’NEILL, et al., PEREA, DEPORAH POOCHIGIAN, AND

KEN TANIGUCHI AND REQUIRING

Defendants. PLAINTIFF TO EFFECT SERVICE OF

SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT WITHIN

FOURTEEN DAYS

(ECF No. 3)

18 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, Brian Pacheco, Ken Taniguchi, and Elizabeth Diaz (“Defendants”) based on delays in bringing him to trial on allegations that he was a sexually violent predator. On December 11, 2019, the summonses issued in this matter.…

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.