Newsom

(PC) Coleman v. Newsom

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 18, 20222:90-cv-00520California1,998 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RALPH COLEMAN, et al., No. 2:90-cv-0520 KJM DB P Plaintiffs, v. ORDER GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., Defendants.

17 Plaintiffs have moved to clarify the court’s June 13, 2002 order requiring defendants to “maintain the vacancy rate among psychiatrists and case managers at a maximum of ten percent, including contracted services,” June 13, 2002 Order, ECF No. 1383, at 4 (hereafter 2002 Order). ECF No. 7118. Specifically, plaintiffs seek clarification regarding whether the 2002 Order applies to chief psychiatrist and senior psychiatrist supervisor positions. Id. at 3. Defendants oppose the motion, ECF No. 7137, and plaintiffs have filed a reply, ECF No. 7149. In addition, 24 25 26 1 In this order citations to page numbers in documents filed in the Court’s Electronic Case Filing (ECF) system are to the page number assigned by ECF and located in the upper righthand corner of the page. 28 as authorized by the court, ECF No. 7472, the parties…

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.