1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. HOLLIS v. GORBY
 

HOLLIS v. GORBY

No. 2:09-cv-1627 JAM CKD P.

MARVIN GLENN HOLLIS, Plaintiff, v. A. GORBY, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

July 26, 2012.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Marvin Glenn Hollis, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

A Gorby, Defendant, represented by Kathleen J. Williams , Williams and Associates, Christina Carroll , Department of Insurance, Craig Andrew Tomlins , Williams & Associates & Sheila Dana'e Crawford , Williams & Associates.

A Tovar, Sr., Defendant, represented by Kathleen J. Williams , Williams and Associates, Christina Carroll , Department of Insurance, Craig Andrew Tomlins , Williams & Associates & Sheila Dana'e Crawford , Williams & Associates.

J M Wright, Defendant, represented by Kathleen J. Williams , Williams and Associates, Christina Carroll , Department of Insurance, Craig Andrew Tomlins , Williams & Associates & Sheila Dana'e Crawford , Williams & Associates.

G Lowry, Defendant, represented by Kathleen J. Williams , Williams and Associates, Christina Carroll , Department of Insurance, Craig Andrew Tomlins , Williams & Associates & Sheila Dana'e Crawford , Williams & Associates.

J. McGuire, Defendant, represented by Kathleen J. Williams , Williams and Associates, Christina Carroll , Department of Insurance, Craig Andrew Tomlins , Williams & Associates & Sheila Dana'e Crawford , Williams & Associates.

Barton, Defendant, represented by Kathleen J. Williams , Williams and Associates, Christina Carroll , Department of Insurance, Craig Andrew Tomlins , Williams & Associates & Sheila Dana'e Crawford , Williams & Associates.

J. Crawford, Defendant, represented by Kathleen J. Williams , Williams and Associates, Christina Carroll , Department of Insurance, Craig Andrew Tomlins , Williams & Associates & Sheila Dana'e Crawford , Williams & Associates.

ORDER

JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.

On June 12, 2012, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's June 6, 2012 order granting defendants $2,058.19 in costs and fees associated with their bringing a motion to compel plaintiff to be deposed which was granted. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge's orders shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Upon review of the entire file, the court finds...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases