Case: Valdivia v. Davis

2:94-cv-00671 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Filed Date: May 2, 1994

Closed Date: July 2, 2013

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 2, 1994, a group of California parolees filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the State of California. Specifically, plaintiffs challenged California's parole revocation procedures under the Fourteenth Amendment and alleged that the state violated their due process rights. On December 1, 1994, the Court (Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton) certified a class defined as California parolees (1) who are at lar…

On December 1, 1994, the Court (Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton) certified a class defined as California parolees (1) who are at large; (2) who are in custody as alleged parole violators awaiting revocation of their parole status; or (3) who are in custody having been found in violation of parole.

For the next several years, the parties engaged in prolonged discovery. On June 13, 2002, the Court granted partial summary judgment to plaintiffs, holding that California's parole revocation system failed to safeguard plaintiffs' due process rights under Morrissey, 408 U.S. 481, 487-90 (1972). The Court's order emphasized that, in order to ensure adequate due process, probable cause hearings must be both accurate and promptly-held. Valdivia v. Davis, 206 F.Supp. 2d 1068 (E.D. Cal. 2002). Four months later, on October 18, 2002, the Court ordered defendants to file a proposed remedial plan to address the identified due process violations.

On March 17, 2003, defendants presented their proposed Valdivia Remedial Plan (VRP), which added a preliminary Probable Cause Hearing (PCH) to the parole revocation process. Plaintiffs filed objections to the VRP related to the timing and substance of the PCH. On July 23, 2003, the Court set forth the following minimum standards for hearing: that they be conducted by a neutral decision-maker, that parolees have an opportunity to present documentary evidence and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and that the hearing's results be documented in a written report. Valdivia v. Davis, July 23, 2003.

In November 2003, the parties filed a stipulated order for permanent injunctive relief, which the Court approved in March 2004; this injunction included for alternative sanctions for minor parole violations, a PCH within 10 days after a parolee is notified of charges, a revocation hearing no later than 35 days after a parole hold is placed, and appointment of attorneys to represent all parolees facing revocation proceedings.

The parties then fought for years over compliance issues:

Defendants moved, successfully, for the appointment of a Special Master, and on December 16, 2005, the Court appointed Chase Riveland to the position. The Special Master has subsequently filed thirteen reports with the court addressing the implementation of the VRP.
On June 9, 2005, the Court found defendants in violation of the permanent injunction by virtue of a policy decision to prohibit the consideration and use of electronic in-home detention (EID) and substance abuse treatment control units as sanctions in lieu of parole revocation.
On August 31, 2005, the Court ordered that parolees' counsel receive access to information in their client's parole field files without any limitations or restrictions on disclosing the information to the parolee based on perceived risk of harm to the parolee's mental health.
On September 15, 2006, the Court ordered the case related to L.H. v. Schwarzenegger, 2:06-cv-02042-LKK-GGH (E.D. Cal.).
On November 13, 2006, the Court ordered implementation of the recommendations contained in the Special Master's 9/14/06 report, including improving their information systems and maintaining the infrastructure needed for self-monitoring. The Court noted that the information system changes should be coordinated with the changes already underway pursuant to a court order from Armstrong v. Schwarzenegger, 4:94-cv-02307-CW (N.D. Cal.).
On April 4, 2007, the Court entered a stipulated order requiring defendants to take certain steps to ensure timely compliance with the remedial sanctions provisions of the permanent injunction. These steps included, among others, adding more beds as part of the In Custody Drug Treatment Program (ICDTP), increasing the number of operational EID units, as well as distributing information regarding their updated policies and procedures.
On January 14, 2008, the Court ordered that defendants undertake, in consultation with plaintiff attorneys and the special master, efforts to afford due process to parolees who appear too mentally ill to participate in parole revocation proceedings.
On March 25, 2008, the Court adopted the report and recommendations of the Special Master, which held that use of hearsay evidence in parole revocation proceedings would be limited by parolee's confrontation rights as established by controlling law. Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, 548 F.Supp.2d 852 (E.D. Cal. 2008). This decision was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. 603 F.Supp.2d 1275 (E.D. Cal 2009).
On August 7, 2008, the Court ordered specific procedures for Defendants upon taking custody of parolees who may have mental health problems. This order was prompted by a motion submitted jointly by plaintiff classes in this case and Coleman v. Schwarzenegger.
On April 12, 2010, the district court found Defendants in substantial compliance with the injunction's requirements regarding designation of information as confidential, consideration of remedial sanctions at each step, remedial sanctions order requirements for female parolees, and out of county transfers.
On December 2, 2010 the district court held that the defendants had met the requirements of the court's April 4, 2007 order and the return to custody assessment step of the revocation process for all facilities, including Los Angeles County Jail. Moreover, the court found defendants in violation of the November 13, 2006 order concerning information system changes. Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, 2010 WL 4983396 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2010).
On May 13, 2011, the Court found the Defendants in substantial compliance with the injunction's requirements that Plaintiffs' counsel have access to the information reasonably necessary to monitor compliance and that Deputy Commissioners shall not have authority to increase the Return to Custody Assessment at the PCH.

On November 4, 2008, California voters passed Proposition 9, which altered a number of the parameters for the parole revocation systems that had been mandated by the VRP. Plaintiffs moved to enjoin enforcement of portions of Proposition 9 as conflicting with the VRP; defendants cross-moved to modify the VRP to conform to the new law. After hearing, the Court denied the defendants' motion and granted plaintiffs' motion in substantial part. Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, 603 F. Supp. 2d 1275 (E.D. Cal. 2009). On appeal, the Ninth Circuit held that the court erred by failing to make an express determination that Proposition 9 violated constitutional rights or that the injunction was necessary to remedy a constitutional violation. Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, 599 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2010). On remand, the Court determined several aspects of Proposition 9 were unconstitutional and ultimately granted plaintiffs' motion to enforce the VRP, with some modifications. Valdivia v. Brown, 2012 WL 219342 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2012).

In April of 2011, California transferred substantial responsibilities for the parole system to county authorities and state courts. On July 2, 2013, the Court found that the statutory realigned rendered this case moot and directed the parties to file their final motions for fees and costs. On December 17, 2013, the Ninth Circuit dismissed all pending appeals as moot.

This case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Timothy Shoffner (10/12/2012)

Tifani Sadek (10/2/2014)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4161514/parties/valdivia-v-schwarzenegger/

Judge(s)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Aljens, Erika C. (Pennsylvania)

Baldwin, Holly MacLeish (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Acquisto, Stephen (California)

Anderson, Robert R. (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Adams, Mark F. (California)

Judge(s)

Burrell, Garland Ellis (California)

Hawkins, Michael Daly (Arizona)

Hollows, Gregory G. (California)

Karlton, Lawrence K. (California)

Noonan, John T. Jr. (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Aljens, Erika C. (Pennsylvania)

Baldwin, Holly MacLeish (California)

Bien, Michael W. (California)

Burrell, Susan L. (California)

Comiskey, Paul Wayne (California)

Galvan, Ernest (California)

Grunfeld, Gay Crosthwait (California)

Herman, Richard P. (California)

Holtz, Geoffrey Thomas (California)

Huey, Shirley (California)

Kennard, Karen (California)

Landon, Alexander L. (California)

Miller, Andrea M. (California)

Morris, Maria V. (Alabama)

Nelson, Laurel M. (California)

Palumbo, Kristen A. (California)

Pavone, Benjamin Laurence (California)

Perrello, Stephen J. Jr. (California)

Prescott, David (California)

Rifkin, Lori Ellen (California)

Rosen, Sanford Jay (California)

Specter, Donald H. (California)

Stewart, Loren Grey (California)

Walczak, Kenneth M. (California)

Wallace, Jackson (California)

Willits, Mari L. (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Acquisto, Stephen (California)

Anderson, Robert R. (California)

Bar, Erika C. (California)

Cashdollar, William V. (California)

Devencenzi, Jessica (California)

Grunder, Frances T. (California)

Gruwell, Paul B. (California)

Humes, James M. (California)

Jacob, Renju Palanilkumuryil (California)

Johnson, S. Anne (California)

Johnson, Sally Anne (California)

Lee, Michael Gregory (California)

Lockyer, Bill (California)

Manian, Maya (California)

Mello, Paul Brian (California)

Nussbaum, Peter David (California)

Oliver-Thompson, Megan (California)

Patterson, Thomas S. (California)

Rice, Benjamin Terrence (California)

Schneider, Walter R. (California)

Tebrock, Katherine (California)

Thompson, Megan Oliver (California)

Whitney, Vickie Pochelle (California)

Wolff, Samantha D. (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Campbell, Nancy (Washington)

Riveland, Chase (Washington)

Other

Adams, Mark F. (California)

Flood, Valerie D (California)

McCabe, Michael J. (California)

Morrison, Virginia (California)

Philipsborn, John Timothy (California)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

2:94-cv-00671 08-15889 12-15457 12-15492 95-80113	Docket [PACER] Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger	April 23, 2014	April 23, 2014 Docket
1 2:94-cv-00671	CIVIL COMPLAINT-CLASS ACTION FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND FOR DAMAGES Cervantes v. California	May 2, 1994	May 2, 1994 Complaint
76 2:94-cv-00671	Order [certifying P class] Cervantes v. California	Nov. 29, 1994	Nov. 29, 1994 Order/Opinion
540 2:94-cv-00671	Order {Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss}	Sept. 8, 2000	Sept. 8, 2000 Order/Opinion
664 2:94-cv-00671	Order [granting partial summary judgment to Pl.]	June 13, 2002	June 13, 2002 Order/Opinion 206 F.Supp.2d 1068
709 2:94-cv-00671	Order [certifying Def's interlocutory appeal re: 6/13/02 order]	Aug. 29, 2002	Aug. 29, 2002 Order/Opinion
714 2:94-cv-00671	FIFTH AMENDED CIVIL CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Valdivia v. Wilson	Sept. 13, 2002	Sept. 13, 2002 Complaint
742 2:94-cv-00671	Order [that Def. serve proposed remedial plan]	Oct. 17, 2002	Oct. 17, 2002 Order/Opinion
796 2:94-cv-00671	Order [ruling on P's objections to D's proposed remedial plan]	July 23, 2003	July 23, 2003 Order/Opinion
2:94-cv-00671	Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunctive Relief Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger	Nov. 19, 2003	Nov. 19, 2003 Order/Opinion

show / hide documents

Resources

Resources related to this case
Title	Description		External URL Date / External URL
Plata v. Brown and Realignment: Jails, Prisons, Courts, and Politics Margo Schlanger	This Article explores pertinent features of the relevant legal and political ecosystem in which California shrank its prison population. Informed by court documents, state reports and policy papers,…	Winter 2013	Dec. 1, 2013 https://clearinghouse-umich-production.s3.amazonaws.com/...

show / hide resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4161514/valdivia-v-schwarzenegger/

Last updated Nov. 2, 2026, 8:38 p.m.

Change selected docket

Docket for: Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger

ECF Number	Date	Description	Link
	Sept. 20, 1991	LODGED Order after hearing by plaintiffs (old)
1	May 2, 1994	COMPLAINT before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton; Case referred to Magistrate Gregory G Hollows; Summons issued; fee paid; Receipt # 158131; jury demand by plaintiff; Notice re: Consent forms sent (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
2	May 2, 1994	ORDER setting scheduling conference for 10:30 am on 8/1/94 before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
3	May 2, 1994	MOTION for preliminary injunction by plaintiff Williams motion to be heard by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
4	May 2, 1994	MOTION for temporary restraining order by plaintiff Cervantes and for preliminary injunction by plaintiff motion to be heard by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
5	May 2, 1994	POINTS AND AUTHORITIES by plaintiffs in support of motion for temporary restraining order and [4-1], of motion [4-2] for preliminary injunction by plaintiff Cervantes and motion preliminary injunction by plaintiff Williams [3-1] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
6	May 2, 1994	DECLARATION of Steven G Williams in support of motion for temporary restraining order [4-1], motion for preliminary injunction [4-2] [3-1] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
7	May 2, 1994	DECLARATION of Attonrey Stephen J Perrello Jr in support re motion for preliminary injunction by plaintiff Williams [3-1] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
8	May 2, 1994	DECLARATION of attorney Paul Comiskey in support of motion for temporary restraining order by plaintiff Cervantes [4-1], and motions for preliminary injunction by plaintiffs [4-2] [3-1] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
9	May 2, 1994	DECLARATION of Vincent Cervantes in support of motion for temporary restraining order [4-1] and motion for preliminary injunction [4-2] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)	RECAP
10	May 2, 1994	MINUTES of 5/2/94 before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton: Setting hearing on motion for temporary restraining order [4-1] and preliminary injunction [4-2] [3-1] by plaintiff's for 9:15 am on 5/19/94 (old) (Entered: 05/04/1994)	RECAP
	May 2, 1994	LODGED order on motions for restraining order and injunction by plaintiffs (old)
11	May 5, 1994	ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton ORDERING the court will construe pltfs' memoranda of points and authorities in support of TRO as their moving papers on the motion for a preliminary injunction; All opposition to the granting of the motion must be filed by 5/13/94; Reply brief, if any, to be filed by 5/17/94; Hearing on motion is SET for 5/19/94 at 9:15 in ctrm 1; The parties are directed to address in their briefs the effect ot he Younger doctrine on the availability of injunctive relief in this case (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 05/05/1994)	RECAP
12	May 5, 1994	LODGED Document order on motions for restraining order and injunction by pltfs-NOT TO BE SIGNED (old) (Entered: 05/05/1994)	RECAP
13	May 10, 1994	NOTICE pursuant to Local Rule 231(D)(3) by defendant setting hearing for 5/19/94 at 9:00 am on motion for preliminary injunction before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 05/11/1994)	RECAP
14	May 13, 1994	OPPOSITION by defendants to motion for temporary restraining order [4-1] and motions for preliminary injunction [3-1][4-2] by plaintiffs (old) (Entered: 05/13/1994)	RECAP
15	May 17, 1994	REPLY MEMORANDUM on motions for preliminary injunctions by plaintiffs (old) (Entered: 05/17/1994)	RECAP
16	May 17, 1994	DECLARATION of Stephen J Perrello, Jr in support of motions for temporary restraining order [4-1] and motions for preliminary injunction [4-2] [3-1] (old) (Entered: 05/17/1994)	RECAP
17	May 17, 1994	MOTION in limine to preclude oral testimony and for other relief by pltfs motion to be heard on 5/19/94 at 9:15 by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 05/17/1994)	RECAP
18	May 17, 1994	DECLARATION of Michael Connolly in support of opposition to motions for preliminary injunction [14-1] (old) (Entered: 05/18/1994)	RECAP
19	May 18, 1994	OPPOSITION by defendants State of CA, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez to motion in limine to preclude oral testimony and for other relief by pltfs [17-1] (old) (Entered: 05/19/1994)	RECAP
20	May 18, 1994	RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS REPLY by defendants State of CA, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez to response to motion in limine to preclude oral testimony and for relief [17-1] (old) (Entered: 05/19/1994)	RECAP
21	May 19, 1994	MINUTES before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton: Hearing on pltf's motions for preliminary injunctions (4-1][4-2][3-1] Motions DENIED; Deft to prepare order; Documents and exhibits filed in court (old) (Entered: 05/20/1994)	RECAP
22	May 19, 1994	SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION of Issac Cubillos for preliminary injunctions (old) (Entered: 05/20/1994)	RECAP
34	May 19, 1994	SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION of Stephen J Perrello, Jr for preliminary injunctions (old) Modified on 06/14/1994 (Entered: 06/09/1994)	RECAP
23	May 23, 1994	TRANSCRIPT of Judges Decision on 5/19/94 (old) (Entered: 05/24/1994)	RECAP
24	May 24, 1994	NOTICE of lodging of proposed order by defendants State of California, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez (old) (Entered: 05/25/1994)	RECAP
25	May 24, 1994	ANSWER and demand for jury trial by defendants (old) (Entered: 05/25/1994)	RECAP
	May 24, 1994	LODGED order after hearing on plaintiffs motions for preliminary injunctions by defendants (old)
26	May 31, 1994	NOTICE by paintiffs Vincent Cervantes, Steven G Williams of partial transcript of 5/19/94 (old) (Entered: 06/02/1994)	RECAP
27	May 31, 1994	CONDITIONAL MOTION by plaintiffs for hearing and argument on order denying motions for preliminary injunctions (old) (Entered: 06/02/1994)	RECAP
28	May 31, 1994	MEMORANDUM by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes, Steven G Williams in support of motion by plaintiffs for hearing and argument on order denying motions for preliminary injunctions [27-1] (old) (Entered: 06/02/1994)	RECAP
29	May 31, 1994	DECLARATION of Attorney Stephen J Perrello Jr in opposition to lodged proposed Order (on settlement of order denying motions) submitted by defendants (old) (Entered: 06/02/1994)	RECAP
	May 31, 1994	LODGED reporter's transcript of 5/19/94 (old)
30	June 2, 1994	OPPOSITION by defendants to motion by plaintiffs for hearing and argument on proposed order denying motions for preliminary injunctions [27-1] (old) (Entered: 06/03/1994)	RECAP
31	June 6, 1994	FURTHER OPPOSITION by defendants to motion by plaintiffs for hearing and argument on order denying motions for preliminary injunctions [27-1] (old) (Entered: 06/08/1994)	RECAP
32	June 8, 1994	ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton DENYING motions for preliminary injunction by plaintiff [4-2] [3-1] and ORDERING the court emphasizes that its order is limited to the motion before it and is issued without prejudice to any future motions by either party; The plaintiffs' Conditional Motion for hearing and Argument is therefore MOOT (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 06/08/1994)	RECAP
33	June 8, 1994	LODGED Document by defendants of order after hearing on plaintiffs' motions for preliminary injunctions-NOT TO BE SIGNED by LKK (old) (Entered: 06/08/1994)	RECAP
35	June 14, 1994	MOTION by defendants to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case motion to be heard by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton on 7/18/94 at 10:00am (old) (Entered: 06/15/1994)	RECAP
36	June 15, 1994	NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to dismiss by defendants motion to be heard on 7/18/94 at 10:00 by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 06/16/1994)	RECAP
37	July 5, 1994	MOTION to continue by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams ; motion to be heard on 07/18/94 at 10:00am by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)	RECAP
38	July 5, 1994	RESPONSE by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams to motion to dismiss by defendants [36-1] and motion by defendants to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case [35-1] (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)	RECAP
39	July 5, 1994	MOTION to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams ; motion to be heard on 09/06/94 at 10:00am by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)	RECAP
40	July 5, 1994	DECLARATION of Stephen J Perrello Jr In Support of motion to continue by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [37-1] (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)	RECAP
41	July 5, 1994	MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in support of motion to continue by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [37-1] (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 07/05/1994)	RECAP
42	July 5, 1994	MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in support of motion to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [39-1] (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 07/05/1994)	RECAP
43	July 5, 1994	MOTION to certify class action Rule 23 by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams ; motion to be heard on 09/06/94 at 10:00am by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 07/05/1994)	RECAP
44	July 5, 1994	MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in support of motion to certify class action Rule 23 by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [43-1] (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 07/05/1994)	RECAP
	July 5, 1994	LODGED First Amended Civil Complaint Class Action for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (old)
45	July 6, 1994	OPPOSITION to motion to continue by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [37-1] by defendants (old) (Washington, S). Modified on 10/12/2017 (Washington, S). (Entered: 07/07/1994)	RECAP
46	July 6, 1994	REPLY by defendants to response to motion to dismiss by defendants [36-1] and motion to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case [35-1] (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 07/08/1994)	RECAP
47	July 8, 1994	ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton ORDERING Hearing on motion to dismiss [36-1] and motion by defendants to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case [35-1] by defendants is CONTINUED to 10:00 am on 9/6/94; Plaintiffs shall notice their motion to certify class action Rule 23 [43-1] and motion to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams will be noticed for hearing on 9/6/94; Defendants may tender their objections to the amended complaint in their oppsition to the motion to amend or by cross-motion timely noticed for hearing on 9/6/94; The parties are directed to address the applicability of Younger abstention to the amended complaint in their briefs (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 07/08/1994)	RECAP
48	July 8, 1994	NOTICE by plaintiffs of motion for continuance LR 230 (e)(g) [37-1] (old) (Entered: 07/11/1994)	RECAP
49	July 8, 1994	NOTICE by plaintiffs for leave to file amended complaint [39-1] (old) (Entered: 07/11/1994)	RECAP
50	July 8, 1994	NOTICE by plaintiffs of motion for certification of class action (Rule 23) [43-1] (old) (Entered: 07/11/1994)	RECAP
51	July 8, 1994	PROOF OF SERVICE by plaintiff of order setting status conference [2-1] (old) (Entered: 07/11/1994)	RECAP
52	July 25, 1994	STATUS REPORT by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)	RECAP
53	July 25, 1994	STATUS REPORT by defendants State of CA, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)	RECAP
54	July 25, 1994	PROOF OF SERVICE of [1-1] complaint and summons to defendant Pete Wilson (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)	RECAP
55	July 25, 1994	PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to Craig L Brown (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)	RECAP
56	July 25, 1994	PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to Joe Sandoval (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)	RECAP
57	July 25, 1994	PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to the State of California by serving the State Attorney Generals Office Karen Files (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)	RECAP
58	July 25, 1994	PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to James H Gomes by service on Judith Debelle (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)	RECAP
59	July 25, 1994	PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to James A Browning Jr (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)	RECAP
61	Aug. 1, 1994	MINUTES of 8/1/94 before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton: Status conference HELD; Pretrial conference SET 1/16/96 at 3:30 pm; Jury trial set 4/23/96 at 10:00; Trial estimated to be 15 days; Court order to follow (old) (Entered: 08/09/1994)	RECAP
60	Aug. 3, 1994	NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to dismiss by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray ; motion to be heard on 09/06/94 at 10:00am by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 08/04/1994)	RECAP
62	Aug. 9, 1994	STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton ORDERING: motion filing ddl set for 10/1/95; discovery ddl set for 8/1/95; pretrial conference set for 2:30pm on 1/16/96; jury trial set for 10:00am on 4/23/96 (cc: all counsel) (kb) (Entered: 08/09/1994)	RECAP
64	Aug. 19, 1994	OPPOSITION by defendants to motion to certify class action Rule 23 by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [43-1] and NON-OPPOSITION to motion to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [39-1] (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 08/24/1994)	RECAP
63	Aug. 22, 1994	PLAINTIFFS Vincent Cervantes and Steven Williams Opposition to motion to dismiss by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray [60-1] (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 08/22/1994)	RECAP
65	Aug. 29, 1994	REPLY to Plaintiffs' Opposition by defendants [60-1], motion to dismiss by defendants [36-1], motion by defendants to stay the damages portion the equitable portion of the case [35-1] (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 08/30/1994)	RECAP
66	Aug. 29, 1994	REPLY to Opposition to motion to certify class action Rule 23 [43-1] by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 08/31/1994)	RECAP
67	Sept. 2, 1994	SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION by plaintiffs to motion to dismiss by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray [60-1] (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 09/06/1994)	RECAP
68	Sept. 6, 1994	MINUTES of 09/06/94 before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton: Motion to dismiss by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray [60-1] is DENIED; Motion to certify class action Rule 23 by plaintiffs Cervantes and Steven G Williams [43-1] is SUBMITTED after further briefing; Letter briefs to be filed by 9/19/94 by 4:30 for plaintiffs and oppositions to brief due 9/26/94 by 4:30; Motion to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [39-1] is GRANTED; Court ORDERED amended complaint filed as of 9/6/94; Motion to dismiss by defendants [36-1] or to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case [35-1] is DENIED; Order to be prepared by plaintiff and submitted within 22 days; C/R Richard Fong (old) (Entered: 09/07/1994)	RECAP
69	Sept. 6, 1994	FIREST AMENDED CIVIL COMPLAINT CLASS ACTION [1-1] by plaintiffs (old) (Washington, S). (Entered: 09/07/1994)	RECAP
70	Sept. 6, 1994	SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES to [67-1] by plaintiffs in opposition to motion to dismiss (old) (Entered: 09/07/1994)	RECAP
71	Sept. 15, 1994	TRANSCRIPT of proceeding hearing on 9/6/94 by C/R Richard Fong (ndd) (Entered: 09/15/1994)	RECAP
72	Sept. 20, 1994	BRIEF by plaintiffs on standing and mootness [68-1] (old) (Entered: 09/21/1994)	RECAP
73	Sept. 22, 1994	LETTER to court from counsel for defendants regarding [72-1] the letter brief filed in opposition to their earlier arguments on the issues of standing and mootness (old) (Entered: 09/23/1994)	RECAP
74	Nov. 14, 1994	ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton ORDERING that plaintiffs' motion for leave to file amended complaint [39-1] is GRANTED; plaintiffs' motion for class certification [43-1] is TAKEN UNDER SUBMISSION pending further briefing on the jurisdictional issues; defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint [60-1] is DENIED (cc: all counsel) (ndd) (Entered: 11/14/1994)	RECAP
75	Nov. 28, 1994	ANSWER by defendants State of CA, Pete Wilson, James Gomez, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, Judith A McGillivray to first amended complaint (kb) (Entered: 11/30/1994)	RECAP
76	Dec. 1, 1994	ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton defendants' objections to class certification on standing and mootness grounds are rejected; pursuant to this court's order file 11/14/94, a class is hereby certified under Rule 23(b)(2), consisting of: (1) California parolees at large; (2) California parolees in custody, as alleged parole violators, and who are awaiting revocation of their state parole; and (3) California parolees who are in custody having been found in violation of parole and who have been thereupon sentenced to prison custody [43-1] (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 12/01/1994)	RECAP
77	Dec. 9, 1994	DEFENDANTS' NOTICE of automatic substitution of party Michael Connolly substituted for dft Judith McGillivray pursuant to rule 25 of the Federal Rules of civil procedure (old) Modified on 11/03/1995 (Entered: 12/12/1994)	RECAP
	March 16, 1995	LODGED Stipulation re no purging of documents pending completion of discovery of by plaintiffs (kb)
	March 21, 1995	LODGED STIPULATION EXTENSION of time to produce documents and response to request for production of documents by defendants (old)
80	March 27, 1995	STIPULATION to extend time to and including 5/3/95 w/i which for pltfs to respond to interrogatories propounded by dfts (old) (Entered: 03/29/1995)	RECAP
79	March 29, 1995	STIPULATION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows granting lodged extension of time to 4/10/95 for defendants to serve responses to second request for production [0-0] (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 03/29/1995)	RECAP
82	April 10, 1995	RESPONSE to pltf's first request for production of documents by defts Judith A McGillivray, James Gomez, Craig L Brown, Joe Sandoval, Pete Wilson, State of CA (old) (Entered: 04/12/1995)	RECAP
81	April 12, 1995	STIPULATION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Gregory G Hollows ORDERING that there will be no purging of documents re this action pending the completion of discovery (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 04/12/1995)	RECAP
	Aug. 18, 1995	LODGED Stipulation of parties for extension of time to complete discovery; AND motions to continuance of trail date by plaintiff Steven G Williams (old)
83	Sept. 22, 1995	STIPULATION of parties: scheduling of further status condrence; extension of time to complete discovery and continuance of trial date (old) (Entered: 09/26/1995)	RECAP
	Sept. 22, 1995	LODGED Order Scheduling Further Status Conference submitted by V Sult (old)
84	Sept. 26, 1995	ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton pretrial conference set for 11:30 10/16/95 (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 09/26/1995)	RECAP
86	Oct. 16, 1995	MINUTES of Status Conference before Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton, pretrial conference set for 3:00 12/9/96 trial set for 10:00 3/4/97 Court order to follow (old) (Entered: 10/20/1995)	RECAP
85	Oct. 18, 1995	ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton pretrial conference set for 3:00 12/9/96 jury trial set for 10:00 3/4/97 motion filing ddl set for 4/30/96 discovery ddl set for 5/30/96 (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 10/18/1995)	RECAP
87	Nov. 1, 1995	NOTICE by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Michael Connolly regarding substitution of Tom Maddock in place of dft Brown pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 25(d) (kb) (Entered: 11/03/1995)	RECAP
88	Jan. 3, 1996	STIPULATION to extend time within which defendants may respond to plaintiff's thir request for documents (old) (Entered: 01/04/1996)	RECAP
89	March 25, 1996	MOTION by attorney Stephen J Perrello, Jr to seal his motion to withdraw as counsel for Vincent Cervantes motion not noticed before Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)	RECAP
90	March 25, 1996	MOTION by attorney Stephen J Perrello, Jr for leave to withdraw as attorneys of record of Vincent Cervantes motion not noticed before Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)	RECAP
91	March 25, 1996	PROPOSED NOTICE of change of attorneys by attorney Stephen J Perrello representing plaintiff Vincent Cervantes (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)	RECAP
93	March 25, 1996	DECLARATION of Stephen J Perello, Jr in support of his motion to withdraw as attorney of record (filed under seal and placed in vault) (old) (Entered: 04/10/1996)	RECAP

show / hide docket entries

Case Details

State / Territory:

California

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Special Collection(s):

California's Prisoners' Rights Bar article

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 2, 1994

Closing Date: July 2, 2013

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

(1) California parolees at large; (2) California parolees in custody, as alleged parole violators, and who are awaiting revocation of their state parole; and (3) California parolees who are in custody, having been found in violation of parole and who have been thereupon sentenced to prison custody.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

Prison Law Office

Rosen, Bien, Galvan & Grunfeld

Youth Law Center

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

State