Farr

Farr v. Paramo

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 20193:16-cv-01279California1,406 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES EMMETT FARR, Case No.: 16cv1279-JLS(MSB)

Plaintiff,

ORDER:

v. (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO D. PARAMO, et al.,

CONTINUE DEADLINE TO OPPOSE

Defendants. DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

AND

18 (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S SECOND MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL [ECF NO. 82]

20 21 On August 26, 2019, Plaintiff James Emmett Farr filed a document entitled “Ex Parte Motion to Apprise this Court of Plaintiff’s Inability to Prosecute This Case Due to Circumstances Out of His Control,” which the Court accepted on discrepancy on September 3, 2019. (See ECF Nos. 81 & 82.) In his filing, Plaintiff states that he is not able to “adequately” prosecute this case because on July 18, 2019, he was placed in administrative segregation by the nonparty staff at the Richard J. Donovan Correctional personal property, legal notes, books and record of…

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.