1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. GRESHAM v. PICKER
 

GRESHAM v. PICKER

Case No. 2:16-CV-01848-JAM-CKD.

VICTOR GRESHAM and CONQUEST COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, LLC, Plaintiffs, v. MICHAEL PICKER, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

December 11, 2017.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Nature of Suit: 950 Constitutional - State Statute
Source: PACER

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Victor Gresham, Plaintiff, represented by Bradley A. Benbrook , Benbrook Law Group.

Victor Gresham, Plaintiff, represented by Jason Torchinsky , Holtzman Vogel Josefiak Torchinsky PLLC, pro hac vice & Stephen M. Duvernay , Benbrook Law Group.

Conquest Communications Group, LLC, Plaintiff, represented by Bradley A. Benbrook , Benbrook Law Group, Jason Torchinsky , Holtzman Vogel Josefiak Torchinsky PLLC, pro hac vice & Stephen M. Duvernay , Benbrook Law Group.

Michael Picker, Defendant, represented by Arocles Aguilar , California Public Utilities Commission, Christine Jun Hammond , California Public Utilities Commission & Harvey Y. Morris , California Public Utilities Commission.

Mike Florio, Defendant, represented by Arocles Aguilar , California Public Utilities Commission, Christine Jun Hammond , California Public Utilities Commission & Harvey Y. Morris , California Public Utilities Commission.

Carla Peterman, Defendant, represented by Arocles Aguilar , California Public Utilities Commission, Christine Jun Hammond , California Public Utilities Commission & Harvey Y. Morris , California Public Utilities Commission.

Liane Randolph, Defendant, represented by Arocles Aguilar , California Public Utilities Commission, Christine Jun Hammond , California Public Utilities Commission & Harvey Y. Morris , California Public Utilities Commission.

Catherine Sandoval, Defendant, represented by Arocles Aguilar , California Public Utilities Commission, Christine Jun Hammond , California Public Utilities Commission & Harvey Y. Morris , California Public Utilities Commission.

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING NOVEMBER 1, 2017 ORDER REQUIRING JOINT STATUS REPORT

At the request of parties, the Court on October 31, 2017 stayed this matter pending resolution of an appeal the plaintiffs took to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals from this Court's order denying their motion for a preliminary...

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