Support the Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse?

The Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse is committed to making information about civil rights lawsuits public, accessible, and free. If you use our--recently revamped--website and the posted documents and information, would you consider a donation? Our small but mighty team relies principally on grant funding and donations. Can you help?

Support the Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse?

The Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse is committed to making information about civil rights lawsuits public, accessible, and free. If you use our--recently revamped--website and the posted documents and information, would you consider a donation? Our small but mighty team relies principally on grant funding and donations. Can you help?

Thank you!

DONATE

Case: Gilman v. Brown

2:05-cv-00830 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Filed Date: April 7, 2005

Closed Date: 2017

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On April 7, 2005, a California state prisoner serving a life sentence with possibility of parole file a pro se lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California against members of the Board of Parole Hearings (formerly the Board of Prison Terms and Parole) and the governor of California, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff asked the court for injunctive relief, alleging that the defendants maintained a review practices violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth…

On April 7, 2005, a California state prisoner serving a life sentence with possibility of parole file a pro se lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California against members of the Board of Parole Hearings (formerly the Board of Prison Terms and Parole) and the governor of California, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff asked the court for injunctive relief, alleging that the defendants maintained a review practices violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Specifically, the plaintiff alleged that the defendants maintained a systematic pattern of denial of parole solely based on unchangeable factors, such as the offence and pre-imprisonment conduct.

The case then spent several years in discovery and motion practice. On June 2, 2008, the Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows designated legal counsel for the plaintiff, who then filed Corrected Fourth Amended Complaint on January 29, 2009. The complaint contained eight named plaintiffs, but was filed as a class action seeking to represent all California prisoners serving life sentence with possibility of parole. On March 4, 2009, the Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) granted class certification to the plaintiffs, defining the class as California state prisoners who: (i) have been sentenced to a term that includes life; (ii) are serving sentences that include the possibility of parole; (iii) are eligible for parole; and (iv) have been denied parole on one or more occasions. The defendants appealed the class certification to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which granted the petition to appeal on June 2, 2009.

The District Court started receiving motions to intervene. On October 15, 2009, the District Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) granted the defendants' motion to stay proceedings pending interlocutory appeal in part. The proceedings were stayed only in relation to the pending motions to intervene, but denied in other respects without prejudice.

On February 4, 2010, the District Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) denied the motion to dismiss as to the plaintiff's Ninth Cause of Action. With the separate order filed on the same day, the Court granted the plaintiffs' preliminary injunction as to Proposition 9 enjoining enforcement of Proposition 9 as to the named plaintiffs, as the plaintiffs showed the likelihood of success on the merits as to their Ex Post Facto challenge. The Court stated that the application of Proposition 9 will cause irreparable harm absent a preliminary injunction due to the changes the Proposition 9 made in relation to increase in minimum deferral periods, the Board of Parole Hearings discretion and increase in maximum deferral periods. The Court, however, dismissed the Substantive Due Process claim of the plaintiffs as to Proposition 9.

The defendants filed an interlocutory appeal as to preliminary injunction on March 3, 2010. They also filed a motion to stay enforcement of the preliminary injunction on March 5, 2010. On April 7, 2010, the District Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) granted stay only in relation to one of the named plaintiffs, but the injunction remained in effect in relation to other named plaintiffs.

On June 3, 2010, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the order granting class certification. In the meantime, the District Court received a lot of motions to intervene to be considered class members. On September 15, 2010, the District Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) denied all the motions. The Court also kept receiving a number of motions for permissive joinder, all of which were denied by the Court.

On January 24, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Judge Carlos Bea) issued an order and opinion on the appeal as to preliminary injunction. The Court reversed the decision of the District Court, stating that the District Court abused its discretion and the plaintiffs did not establish that they are likely to succeed on the merits, as there was nothing on the facts in the record to infer that Proposition 9 created a significant risk of prolonging plaintiffs' incarceration. Gilman v. Schwarzenegger, 638 F.3d 1101, 1111 (9th Cir. 2010).

On April 25, 2010, the District Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) issued an order amending the definitions of certified class. As to the Eighth Cause of Action, the class is defined all California state prisoners who have been sentenced to a life term with possibility of parole for an offense that occurred before November 4, 2008. As to the Ninth Cause of Action, the class is defined all California state prisoners who have been sentenced to a life term with possibility of parole for an offense that occurred before November 8, 1988.

The plaintiffs filed a motion for class-wide preliminary injunction in relation to the enforcement of Proposition 9 in violation of Ex Post Facto clause, on November 19, 2010. The plaintiffs relied on statistical data in support of granting the injunction. On August 31, 2011, the Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) appointed a neutral statistical expert to analyze the data. Based on the analysis of the data, the expert could not conclude that there is likely to be a risk of prolonged incarceration under Proposition 9 procedures. The Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) denied the motion for preliminary injunction on April 4, 2012.

On March 3, 2012, the defendants entered a motion for judgment on the pleadings. On May 30, 2012, the Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) issued an order granting the motion in relation to three claims, as they challenged the substance of the parole decisions, including the complaint that the Board relies on static factors when making the decisions.

On September 7, 2012, the Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) denied the plaintiffs' motion to file the Fifth Amended Complaint. It also granted the defendants' unopposed motion to de-certify classes for several causes of action. As a result, only the Ex Post Facto challenges to Proposition 9 and the Governor's powers remained as class actions.

On May 6, 2013, the Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and preliminary injunction as to remaining causes of action, as well as defendants' motion for summary judgment and motion to de-certify remaining classes.

Following a trial, the District Court (Judge Lawrence Karlton) issued an order that both Proposition 9 and Proposition 89 violated the Ex Post Facto rights of the class members, on February 28, 2014. The Court stated that there was sufficient evidence that Proposition 9's increase of deferral periods for parole hearing created a significant risk of imposing longer periods of incarceration on the class than was the case when the offence was committed. Furthermore, the advanced hearing proceedings available under Proposition 9 is not sufficient to protect against Ex Post Facto problems created by Proposition 9. The Court stated that, although Proposition 89 is neutral on its face allowing the Governor to reverse both grants and denials of parole, in practice it was used to tip the scales against parole grants. In effect, it denied the class members right to neutral interpretation of the rules, available prior to the new law. The Court, thus declared, both Proposition 9 and Proposition 89, as implemented, violated the ex post facto clauses. The Court also ordered injunctive relief, so that the Board of Parole Hearings is to apply California Penal Code to all members of the class as it existed prior to Proposition 9, and so that the Governor of California is to use the same standards as the Board of Parole Hearings when reviewing cases.

The defendants filed an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on March 27, 2014, in relation to the final judgment and all interlocutory orders.

The plaintiffs filed a motion for attorney's fees on March 28, 2014. The court granted $34,201.56 in attorney's fees on Jul. 28, 2014.

The case was reassigned to Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on Feb. 22, 2016.

The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's order on Feb. 22, 2016. The court first argued that "Proposition 89 remains only a transfer of decisionmaking power, which does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause." 814 F.3d 1007. The court then argued that the district court erred in "basing its findings principally on speculation and inference" regarding Proposition 9. 814 F.3d 1007. The Ninth Circuit argued that the district court did not have enough evidence to support a finding that "an as-applied Ex Post Facto Clause violation...occurred" and that "proving a significant risk of prolonged incarceration in parole cases requires exacting evidence," a standard not met by "a decrease in the frequency of parole hearings—without more." 814 F.3d 1007.

In response, on May 9, 2017, the district court vacated its prior judgment, ordered a judgment be entered for the defendants, and ordered the case closed.

The case is closed.

Summary Authors

Zhandos Kuderin (4/20/2014)

Virginia Weeks (11/5/2017)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5685909/parties/paul-madden-v-fisher/


Judge(s)

Bea, Carlos T. (California)

Callahan, Consuelo Maria (California)

Delaney, Carolyn K. (California)

England, Morrison C. Jr. (California)

Karlton, Lawrence K. (California)

Kozinski, Alex (California)

Noonan, John T. Jr. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Arthur, Phillip L. (California)

Broderick, Daniel J. (California)

Knox, Monica (California)

Judge(s)

Bea, Carlos T. (California)

Callahan, Consuelo Maria (California)

Delaney, Carolyn K. (California)

England, Morrison C. Jr. (California)

Karlton, Lawrence K. (California)

Kozinski, Alex (California)

Noonan, John T. Jr. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Arthur, Phillip L. (California)

Broderick, Daniel J. (California)

Knox, Monica (California)

McClintock, Ann Catherine (California)

Porter, David M. (California)

Scoble, Matthew McCrary (California)

White, Carter C. (California)

White [inactive], Carter Capps (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Acquisto, Stephen (California)

Cassidy, Terence J (California)

Chan, Maria G. (California)

Neill, Jennifer Anne (California)

Pott, Michael William (California)

Rench, Christopher John (California)

Romano, Sara (California)

Williams, Glen Andrew (California)

Other Attorney(s)

Berk, Richard (Pennsylvania)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:05-cv-00830

Docket [PACER]

May 9, 2017

May 9, 2017

Docket
1

2:05-cv-00830

Complaint

April 15, 2005

April 15, 2005

Complaint
158

2:05-cv-00830

Order [Continuation on motions to amend complaint, to certify a plaintiff class, and for a preliminary injuction]

Gilman v. Davis

Dec. 23, 2008

Dec. 23, 2008

Order/Opinion
175

2:05-cv-00830

Corrected Fourth Amended/Supplemental Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief - Class Action

Gilman v. Shwartzenegger

Jan. 29, 2009

Jan. 29, 2009

Complaint
155

2:05-cv-00830

Order

Gilman v. Davis

March 4, 2009

March 4, 2009

Order/Opinion
183

2:05-cv-00830

Order

Gilman v. Davis

March 4, 2009

March 4, 2009

Order/Opinion
204

2:05-cv-00830

Order [To submit briefs regarding effect of the Ninth Circuit's grant of permission on this court's jurisdiction, order granting the parties' stipulation of August 5, 2009, Doc. 202]

Gilman v. Davis

Aug. 11, 2009

Aug. 11, 2009

Order/Opinion
212

2:05-cv-00830

Order

Gilman v. Davis

Oct. 15, 2009

Oct. 15, 2009

Order/Opinion
218

2:05-cv-00830

Order

Gilman v. Davis

Feb. 4, 2010

Feb. 4, 2010

Order/Opinion
217

2:05-cv-00830

Order

Gilman v. Davis

Feb. 4, 2010

Feb. 4, 2010

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5685909/paul-madden-v-fisher/

Last updated Nov. 2, 2022, 3:19 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against all defendants, filed by Richard M Gilman.(Kirkpatrick, S) (Entered: 04/27/2005)

April 27, 2005

April 27, 2005

2

MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Richard M Gilman. (Kirkpatrick, S) (Entered: 04/27/2005)

April 27, 2005

April 27, 2005

3

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Kirkpatrick, S) (Entered: 04/27/2005)

April 27, 2005

April 27, 2005

RECEIPT number 2049032 for $250.00 for civil case filing fee from CA Medical Facility for Gilman (Marcotte, D) (Entered: 05/13/2005)

May 13, 2005

May 13, 2005

4

DECLINE to PROCEED BEFORE US MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Richard M Gilman. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 05/17/2005)

May 16, 2005

May 16, 2005

5

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT filed by Richard Gilman and Michael Brodheim against Noreen Blonien, L Dininni, Jones Moore, Booker Welch, M. Perez and Arnold Schwartzenegger. (Servantes, G) (Entered: 05/24/2005)

May 23, 2005

May 23, 2005

6

REQUEST (MOTION) for Court to direct that service of Complaint be effected by the US Marshall by Richard M. Gilman. (Servantes, G) (Entered: 07/05/2005)

July 1, 2005

July 1, 2005

7

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/12/05. Plaintiff shall submit, w/in 30 days from date of Order, an Affidavit in support if Request to Proceed IFP on form provided. Clerk directed to send plaintiff an Application to Proceed IFP by a Prisoner.(Marciel, M)

July 13, 2005

July 13, 2005

RECAP
8

REQUEST (MOTION) to modify plaintiffs' request for court to direct service of complaint by USM filed by Michael J. Brodheim and Richard M. Gilman. (Girgis, C) (Entered: 07/14/2005)

July 13, 2005

July 13, 2005

9

NOTICE regarding representation of defendant by Michael J. Brodheim and Richard M. Gilman (Girgis, C) (Entered: 07/14/2005)

July 13, 2005

July 13, 2005

SERVICE BY MAIL: 7 Order served on Michael J Brodheim, Richard M. Gilman (w/IFP Application sent to plaintiffs). (Marciel, M) Modified on 7/13/2005 (Marciel, M). (Entered: 07/13/2005)

July 13, 2005

July 13, 2005

10

APPLICATION/REQUEST for Screening and an Extension of Time byNoreen Blonien, L Dininni, Jones Moore, Booker Welch, M. Perez with Proposed Order . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit B# 3 Declaration of service)(Acquisto, Stephen) (Entered: 07/18/2005)

July 18, 2005

July 18, 2005

11

First Amended MOTION to AMEND/CORRECT signatures Request for Screening and Extension of Time by Noreen Blonien, L Dininni, Jones Moore, Booker Welch, M. Perez. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit B# 3 Declaration of service)(Acquisto, Stephen) (Entered: 07/18/2005)

July 18, 2005

July 18, 2005

12

RESPONSE by plaintiffs Michael J Brodheim and Richard M. Gilman to 7 Order. Notice of payment of fees. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 07/21/2005)

July 20, 2005

July 20, 2005

13

REQUEST for USM to serve dft Schwarzenegger by Michael J Brodheim, Richard M. Gilman. Notice of confirmation of waiver of service received for dft Welch. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 07/21/2005)

July 20, 2005

July 20, 2005

14

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/26/05. A separate civil action is to opened for plaintiff Michael J. Brodheim. 5 Amended Complaint filed 5/23/05 is DISMISSED. Clerk directed to send each plaintiff a new form for filing a civil rights action and a new IFP Application. Plaintiffs' 6 8 9 13 Requests are VACATED as are those of defendants filed on 7/18/02 10 11 . (Marciel, M)

July 27, 2005

July 27, 2005

RECAP
15

AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendants filed by Richard M. Gilman.(Girgis, C) (Entered: 08/05/2005)

Aug. 4, 2005

Aug. 4, 2005

16

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 10/26/05. Dfts Perez, Blonien, and Welch must file their response to 8/4/05 amd cmp within 30 days. Clk is directed to issue and send pla 2 summonses and 6 copies of Consent to Proceed before a US Magistrate form with this order. Clk shall serve upon pla a copy of Local Rules of the Court.(Dotson, B)

Oct. 27, 2005

Oct. 27, 2005

RECAP
17

SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Arnold Schwarzenegger* with answer to complaint due within *20* days. Attorney *Richard M. Gilman, C−47508* *California Medical Facility* *PO Box 2500* *Vacaville, CA 95696−2500*. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 10/27/2005)

Oct. 27, 2005

Oct. 27, 2005

18

SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Dennis Kenneally* with answer to complaint due within *20* days. Attorney *Richard M. Gilman, C−47508* *California Medical Facility* *PO Box 2500* *Vacaville, CA 95696−2500*. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 10/27/2005)

Oct. 27, 2005

Oct. 27, 2005

SERVICE BY MAIL: 16 Order and 17 , 18 Issued Summons served on Richard M. Gilman with Local Rules and 6 copies of Consent forms. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 10/27/2005)

Oct. 27, 2005

Oct. 27, 2005

19

REQUEST (entitled motion) for clarification of 14 Order by Richard M. Gilman. (Caspar, M) (Entered: 11/02/2005)

Nov. 1, 2005

Nov. 1, 2005

21

DECLINE to PROCEED BEFORE US MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Richard M. Gilman. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 11/15/2005)

Nov. 14, 2005

Nov. 14, 2005

22

CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Richard M. Gilman of 20 Request and 21 Decline of Jurisdiction of US Magistrate Judge. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 11/15/2005)

Nov. 14, 2005

Nov. 14, 2005

23

SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED by Richard M. Gilman. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Dennis Kenneally served on 11/5/2005. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 11/17/2005)

Nov. 16, 2005

Nov. 16, 2005

24

ANSWER to AMENDED COMPLAINT by Noreen Blonien, Booker Welch, M. Perez. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Acquisto, Stephen) (Entered: 11/21/2005)

Nov. 21, 2005

Nov. 21, 2005

25

REQUEST (Motion) for order directing dft's counsel to honor 14 court's severance of pltfs Gilman from Brodheim by Richard M. Gilman.(Yin, K) (Entered: 12/08/2005)

Dec. 7, 2005

Dec. 7, 2005

26

OBJECTIONS (Motion) to 24 dft's demand for jury trial by Plaintiff Richard M. Gilman. (Yin, K) (Entered: 12/08/2005)

Dec. 7, 2005

Dec. 7, 2005

27

MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT as to dfts' demand for jury trial by Richard M. Gilman. (Yin, K) (Entered: 12/08/2005)

Dec. 7, 2005

Dec. 7, 2005

28

REQUEST for extension of time for service of summons by Richard M. Gilman. Request for USM−285 forms and costs to serve additional dfts. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 12/13/2005)

Dec. 12, 2005

Dec. 12, 2005

29

REQUEST for 2 USM forms and a schedule of Marshal fees for service by Richard M. Gilman. (Caspar, M) (Entered: 12/22/2005)

Dec. 21, 2005

Dec. 21, 2005

30

MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Richard M. Gilman. [MAINTAIN ON PAPER] (Dotson, B) (Entered: 01/12/2006)

Jan. 11, 2006

Jan. 11, 2006

31

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/23/06 DENYING 20 Request for Order directing service upon dfts Schwarzenegger and Kenneally by USM, and GRANTING 20 Request for Extension of time to effect service upon dfts Schwarzenegger and Kenneal ly. Plaintiff must, w/in 60 days, serve process upon defendants Schwarzenegger and Kenneally. Plaintiff must serve dfts w/ a copy of the 10/27/05 order, summons, and 8/4/05 second amended complaint. Plaintiff must also include a copy of this order. T he clerk is directed to re-issue and re-send plaintiff, two summons for Schwarzenegger and Kenneally. The clerk shall also send plaintiff one copy of the 8/4/05 second amended complaint, two copies of the Consent and a copy of the order filed on October 27, 2005 with this order.(Donati, J)

Jan. 23, 2006

Jan. 23, 2006

RECAP
32

SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Arnold Schwarzenegger* with answer to complaint due within *20* days. Attorney *Richard M. Gilman, C−47508* *California Medical Facility* *PO Box 2500* *Vacaville, CA 95696−2500*. (Donati, J) (Entered: 01/23/2006)

Jan. 23, 2006

Jan. 23, 2006

33

SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Dennis Kenneally* with answer to complaint due within *20* days. Attorney *Richard M. Gilman, C−47508* *California Medical Facility* *PO Box 2500* *Vacaville, CA 95696−2500*. (Donati, J) (Entered: 01/23/2006)

Jan. 23, 2006

Jan. 23, 2006

34

DISCOVERY ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/23/06 ORDERING that discovery in this action be governed by this order and all relevant FRCP and Local Rules.(Donati, J) (Entered: 01/23/2006)

Jan. 23, 2006

Jan. 23, 2006

SERVICE BY MAIL: 31 Order, 32 Summons, 33 Summons, 34 Discovery Order, 16 Order, 15 Amended Complaint, and 3 Two Consent Forms served on Richard M. Gilman (Donati, J) (Entered: 01/23/2006)

Jan. 23, 2006

Jan. 23, 2006

35

REQUEST (motion) for court to direct service by USM upon dfts' failure to comply with request for waiver of service by Richard M. Gilman. Delaration of Richard M. Gilman. (Dotson, B) (Entered: 03/02/2006)

March 1, 2006

March 1, 2006

37

MOTION to SUBSTITUTE PARTY due to resignation by Richard M. Gilman. (Caspar, M) (Entered: 03/09/2006)

March 8, 2006

March 8, 2006

38

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 3/22/06. 36 Discovery requests filed by Richard M. Gilman will be placed in the file and disregarded.(Dotson, B)

March 23, 2006

March 23, 2006

RECAP
39

MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT ;Supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities and Notice by Noreen Blonien, Booker Welch, M. Perez. (Acquisto, Stephen) Modified on 5/7/2007 (Donati, J). (Entered: 04/04/2006)

April 4, 2006

April 4, 2006

40

STATEMENT of Undisputed Facts by Defendants Noreen Blonien, Booker Welch, M. Perez re 39 MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT ;Supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities and Notice . (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Tom Remy)(Acquisto, Stephen) (Entered: 04/04/2006)

April 4, 2006

April 4, 2006

41

MOTION for PROTECTIVE ORDER ;Memorandum of Points and Authorities and Notice by Noreen Blonien, Booker Welch, M. Perez. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A,B,C)(Acquisto, Stephen) (Entered: 04/05/2006)

April 5, 2006

April 5, 2006

42

MOTION for EXTENSION of time to file oppositions to defendants' 39 motion for summary judgment and defendants' 41 motion for protective order staying discovery by Richard M. Gilman. (Caspar, M) (Entered: 04/18/2006)

April 17, 2006

April 17, 2006

43

RESPONSE (Declaration) in OPPOSITION to 39 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Yin, K) (Entered: 04/25/2006)

April 24, 2006

April 24, 2006

44

ITEMIZED RESPONSE by Richard M. Gilman to dfts' 40 Statement of Undisputed Facts. (Yin, K) (Entered: 04/25/2006)

April 24, 2006

April 24, 2006

45

STATEMENT of Disputed Facts by Plaintiff Richard M. Gilman. (Yin, K) (Entered: 04/25/2006)

April 24, 2006

April 24, 2006

46

RESPONSE in OPPOSITION to 41 Motion for Protective Order by pltf. (Yin, K) (Entered: 04/25/2006)

April 24, 2006

April 24, 2006

47

LETTER Advising Court of Documents Received from Plaintiff by Defendant which were not Filed at Court by M. Perez (Acquisto, Stephen) Modified on 5/3/2006 (Caspar, M). (Entered: 05/01/2006)

May 1, 2006

May 1, 2006

48

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 5/3/06 ORDERING that plaintiff's 30 request to proceed IFP is GRANTED, but no filing fee is due, plaintiff having paid in full; service is appropriate as yet unserved defendants: Gov. Arnold Schwarze negger and Dennis Kenneally; clerk shall send plaintiff 2 USM forms, one summons, and instruction sheet and a copy of the 8/4/05 second amended complaint and the notice of submission of documents to be completed and returned within 30 days from the date of this order. (Caspar, M) Modified on 5/4/2006 (Caspar, M).

May 4, 2006

May 4, 2006

RECAP
49

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 5/3/06 ORDERING that defendants' 4/5/06 41 motion for a protective order staying discovery as to defendants Perez and Welch is GRANTED, subject to a showing by plaintiff within 20 days of the filed d ate of this order; plaintiff's 4/17/06 42 motion for an extension of time to file his opposition to the 4/4/06 39 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and plaintiff must file his opposition within 30 days of the filed date of this order; any reply to plaintiff's opposition will be due within 7 days of the filing and service dates. (Caspar, M)

May 4, 2006

May 4, 2006

RECAP
51

NOTICE of SUBMISSION of DOCUMENTS: 1 comoleted summons, 2 completed USM forms and 3 copies of the 8/4/05 second amended complaint by Richard M. Gilman (Caspar, M) (Entered: 05/12/2006)

May 11, 2006

May 11, 2006

52

OPPOSITION to defendants' 4/4/06 39 motion for summary judgment(Caspar, M) (Entered: 05/15/2006)

May 12, 2006

May 12, 2006

53

DECLARATION of Richard M. Gilman in SUPPORT OF 52 opposition to defendants' 39 motion of summary judgment. (Caspar, M) (Entered: 05/15/2006)

May 12, 2006

May 12, 2006

54

NOTICE of SUBMISSION of DOCUMENTS by Richard M. Gilman in response to 48 Order. (Caspar, M) (Entered: 05/15/2006)

May 12, 2006

May 12, 2006

55

MEMORANDUM in SUPPORT OF plaintiff's opposition to defendants' 39 motion for summary judgment by Richard M. Gilman. (Caspar, M) (Entered: 05/15/2006)

May 12, 2006

May 12, 2006

56

REPLY BRIEF in Support of 39 Motion for Summary Judgment by Noreen Blonien, Booker Welch, M. Perez. (Acquisto, Stephen) Modified on 5/23/2006 (Donati, J). (Entered: 05/22/2006)

May 22, 2006

May 22, 2006

57

REQUEST (Motion) to Strike Parts of Defendants' Reply Brief by Richard M. Gilman. (Donati, J) (Entered: 06/05/2006)

June 2, 2006

June 2, 2006

58

REQUEST for ( entitled "Motion" ) for Leave to supplement his Opposition to dfts' Motion for Summary Judgment by pltf Richard M. Gilman. (Marciel, M) (Entered: 06/16/2006)

June 15, 2006

June 15, 2006

59

DECLARATION of Michael Brodheim in SUPPORT OF 58 Supplement to Opposition to dfts' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Marciel, M) (Entered: 06/16/2006)

June 15, 2006

June 15, 2006

60

ORDER AND ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE BY THE USM without prepayment of costs signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 6/23/06. The Clerk is directed to fwd the instructions for service of process, the completed summons, copies of the 8/4/05 second amended c omplaint and copies of this order to the USM. Within 10 days from the date of this order, the USM is directed to notify dfts Gov. Arnold Schwarzennegger and Dennis Kenneally of this action. Dfts shall reply to the 8/4/05 second amended complaint within the time provided by the applicable provisions of FRCP 12(a). The Clerk shall serve pltf w/a copy of the lr's of court. (Kastilahn, A)

June 23, 2006

June 23, 2006

RECAP
61

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/25/06 ORDERING that pltf's 27 "motion for summary judgment" is DISREGARDED as such, and construed, instead, as a motion to strike the jury trial demand from the answer of dfts Blonien, Pe rez and Welch; as construed, pltf's motion is GRANTED and dfts' demand for a jury trial is STRICKEN from their answer; pltf's 37 motion to substitute a party is GRANTED, Susan Fisher added, M. Perez terminated. Motions terminated.(Yin, K)

July 26, 2006

July 26, 2006

RECAP
62

NOTICE of apparent non−service by USM from plaintiff Richard M. Gilman. (Marciel, M) (Entered: 09/15/2006)

Sept. 14, 2006

Sept. 14, 2006

63

Defendants' ANSWER to AMENDED COMPLAINT by Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dennis Kenneally. Attorney Acquisto, Stephen added. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Acquisto, Stephen) (Entered: 09/18/2006)

Sept. 18, 2006

Sept. 18, 2006

64

WAIVER of SERVICE returned EXECUTED as to defendants Dennis Kenneally, Arnold Schwarzenegger waiver sent on 9/18/2006, answer due 11/17/2006. (Marciel, M) (Entered: 10/03/2006)

Oct. 2, 2006

Oct. 2, 2006

SERVICE BY MAIL: 65 Scheduling Order served on Richard M. Gilman (Donati, J) (Entered: 01/23/2007)

Jan. 23, 2007

Jan. 23, 2007

66

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/29/07. Plaintiff's Motion for Continuance of defendants' 39 MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT is GRANTED and the stay of plaintiff's discovery requests upon defendants Fisher and Wel ch is LIFTED. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is VACATED from Court's calendar. Defendants Fisher and Welch directed to produce plaintiff, w/in 30 days, only the specific pages of decision portion of parole consideration hearing. Clerk to note in docket that case caption of matter be modified and "Gilman v Perez, et al".(Marciel, M) Modified on 3/28/2007 (Marciel, M).

Jan. 30, 2007

Jan. 30, 2007

RECAP
67

REQUEST for RECONSIDERATION and to STAY Discovery by Board of Parole Hearings, Noreen Blonien, Susan Fisher, L Dininni, Jones Moore, Booker Welch, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dennis Kenneally re 66 Order. Attorney Acquisto, Stephen added. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Acquisto, Stephen) Modified on 2/14/2007 (Donati, J). (Entered: 02/13/2007)

Feb. 13, 2007

Feb. 13, 2007

68

MOTION by Richard M. Gilman requesting Clarification as to status of court's 5/4/06 protective order with respect to discovery. (Donati, J) (Entered: 02/20/2007)

Feb. 16, 2007

Feb. 16, 2007

69

REQUEST by plaintiff Richard M. Gilman for Extension to file an Opposition to defendants' 67 Request for Reconsideration. (Marciel, M) (Entered: 02/26/2007)

Feb. 23, 2007

Feb. 23, 2007

70

ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 3/6/07 ORDERING that, upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed 1/30/07 66 is AFFIRMED and Dfts' 2/13/07 motion for a stay of discovery 67 is DENIED. (Engbretson, K.)

March 7, 2007

March 7, 2007

RECAP
71

MOTION for PROTECTIVE ORDER And REQUEST for Additional Time to Comply with Court's January 30, 2007 Order by Noreen Blonien, Susan Fisher, L Dininni, Jones Moore, Booker Welch, Board of Parole Hearings, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dennis Kenneally. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration # 2 Declaration of Service)(Acquisto, Stephen) Modified on 3/28/2007 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/27/2007)

March 27, 2007

March 27, 2007

72

PROPOSED ORDER re 71 Motion for Protective Order and Request for Additional Time. (Acquisto, Stephen) Modified on 3/28/2007 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/27/2007)

March 27, 2007

March 27, 2007

73

EX PARTE APPLICATION by dfts for an Order Shortening Time on 41 Dfts' Motion for Protective Order and Additional Time; Supporting Declaration of Counsel. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Acquisto, Stephen) Modified on 3/29/2007 (Yin, K). (Entered: 03/28/2007)

March 28, 2007

March 28, 2007

74

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 3/28/07 ORDERING that 73 Ex Parte Application is DISREGARDED as Moot and Clarifying the Protective order re: 68 Motion to Clarify. (Donati, J)

March 28, 2007

March 28, 2007

RECAP
75

MOTION to COMPEL DISCOVERY by Richard M. Gilman. (Yin, K) (Entered: 04/02/2007)

March 30, 2007

March 30, 2007

76

MOTION for SANCTIONS and for order compelling production by Richard M. Gilman. (Yin, K) (Entered: 04/02/2007)

March 30, 2007

March 30, 2007

78

EXHIBITS A−C by Richard M. Gilman. (Yin, K) (Entered: 04/02/2007)

March 30, 2007

March 30, 2007

79

REQUEST for Clarification re: telephone conference call by Richard M. Gilman. (Donati, J) (Entered: 04/06/2007)

April 5, 2007

April 5, 2007

80

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 4/6/07 ORDERING that defendants will produce only the specific pages of the decision portion of parole consideration hearing transcripts. Defense counsel has agreed that any argument that this production do es not constitutre a sufficient representative sample is waived. Defendants must produce and make available to plaintiff the transcripts, as set forth in this order, within 30 days of the filed date of this order. Upon service of the transcripts and re-notice of the summary judgment motion, plaintiff will have 30 days to review the production and to file an opposition or supplemental opposition. Transcripts will be stored in a secure location at the prison, preferably in the senior librarian 9;s office in the prison law library. Plaintiff will have full access to the transcripts, but he will only have access while he is in the prison law library. The defendants are to ascertain that plaintiff is GRANTED the most latitude possible to be i n the law library to review the records. Defendants will have 15 days, following service of any supplemental opposition by plaintiff to their dispositive motion, to file a reply. Re 71 Motion for Protective Order, 75 Motion to Compel Discovery and 76 Motion for Sanctions. (Donati, J) Modified on 2/26/2008 (Donati, J).

April 6, 2007

April 6, 2007

RECAP
81

NOTICE of Dag Acquisto's communication with pltf following telephone conference call with court on the morning of 04/05/07 by Richard M. Gilman. (Manzer, C) (Entered: 04/11/2007)

April 10, 2007

April 10, 2007

82

REQUEST (Motion) to Determine Sufficiency of Objections for by Richard M. Gilman. (Donati, J) (Entered: 04/16/2007)

April 13, 2007

April 13, 2007

83

MOTION to COMPEL Discovery by Richard M. Gilman. (Donati, J) (Entered: 04/24/2007)

April 23, 2007

April 23, 2007

84

MOTION to COMPEL Discovery by Richard M. Gilman. (Yin, K) (Entered: 04/26/2007)

April 25, 2007

April 25, 2007

85

RE−NOTICE of 39 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Acquisto, Stephen) Modified on 5/7/2007 (Donati, J). (Entered: 05/04/2007)

May 4, 2007

May 4, 2007

86

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Phillip L. Arthur and Phillip L. Arthur for Noreen Blonien and Susan Fisher, attorney Stephen Acquisto terminated (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Arthur, Phillip) (Entered: 05/25/2007)

May 25, 2007

May 25, 2007

87

JOINDER in Re−Noticed Motion for Summary Judgment by Noreen Blonien, Susan Fisher, Booker Welch, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dennis Kenneally. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Arthur, Phillip) Modified on 5/29/2007 (Manzer, C). (Entered: 05/25/2007)

May 25, 2007

May 25, 2007

88

MEMORANDUM/RESPONSE in OPPOSITION to 83 and 84 motions to compel. Attorney Arthur, Phillip L. added. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Service)(Arthur, Phillip) Modified on 5/31/2007 (Manzer, C). (Entered: 05/30/2007)

May 30, 2007

May 30, 2007

89

REQUEST for Postponement of Consideration of dfts' motion for summary judgment until dfts turn specific information over to plaintiff by Richard M. Gilman. (Duong, D) (Entered: 06/07/2007)

June 6, 2007

June 6, 2007

90

AFFIDAVIT in support of 89 Request for Postponment of Consideration of dfts' motion for summary judgment by Richard M. Gilman. (Duong, D) (Entered: 06/07/2007)

June 6, 2007

June 6, 2007

91

REQUEST for Extension of time to submit plt's Supplemental Opposition to dfts' Re−Noticed Motion for Summary Judgment 85 by Richard M. Gilman (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Richard M. Gilman)(Duong, D) (Entered: 06/07/2007)

June 6, 2007

June 6, 2007

93

STATEMENT of Undisputed Facts by Defendants Noreen Blonien, Susan Fisher, Booker Welch, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dennis Kenneally re 92 MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT ; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit B# 3 Declaration of Service)(Arthur, Phillip) (Entered: 06/07/2007)

June 7, 2007

June 7, 2007

94

REPLY to RESPONSE to MOTION by plaintiff re 83 84 MOTIONS to COMPEL. (Cayo, A) (Entered: 06/13/2007)

June 12, 2007

June 12, 2007

95

MOTION for EXTENSION of time to file a motion for summary judgment by Michael J. Brodheim. (Anderson, J) (Entered: 06/13/2007)

June 12, 2007

June 12, 2007

96

ORDER signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 6/19/07 re 95 MOTION for EXTENSION of time is DENIED as MOOT. Plaintiff to file his supplemental opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment on or before July 9, 2007. (Cayo, A)

June 19, 2007

June 19, 2007

RECAP
97

MOTION for EXTENSION of time to file opposition to 92 MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT by Richard M. Gilman. (Anderson, J) Modified on 6/22/2007 (Anderson, J). (Entered: 06/22/2007)

June 21, 2007

June 21, 2007

98

ORDER granting 97 Motion for Extension signed by Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 6/29/07. Pltf shall file his supplemental opposition and cross−motion for summary judgment on or before 7/30/07. (Kastilahn, A) (Entered: 06/29/2007)

June 29, 2007

June 29, 2007

SERVICE BY MAIL: 98 Order served on Richard M. Gilman. (Kastilahn, A) (Entered: 06/29/2007)

June 29, 2007

June 29, 2007

99

OPPOSITION by plt to dft's 92 MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT. (Attachments: # 1 Supplemental Opposition# 2 Declaration of Richard Gilman# 3 Declaration of Richard M. Gilman# 4 Itemized Response to dft's Statement of Undisputed Facts)(Duong, D) Additional attachment(s) added on 8/3/2007 (Carlos, K). Additional attachment(s) added on 8/9/2007 (Carlos, K). (Entered: 07/31/2007)

July 30, 2007

July 30, 2007

100

REQUEST (entitled MOTION) for Postponement of consideration of dft Schwarzenegger's motion for summary judgment 92 by Richard M. Gilman (Duong, D) (Entered: 07/31/2007)

July 30, 2007

July 30, 2007

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Criminal Justice (Other)

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 7, 2005

Closing Date: 2017

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Californian prisoners serving life sentence with a possibility of parole

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: Yes

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Governor of California (Sacramento), State

California Department of Corrections, State

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Ex Post Facto

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

Attorneys fees

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

None

Amount Defendant Pays: 34,201.56

Order Duration: 2014 - None

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Preliminary relief denied

Goals (e.g., for hiring, admissions)

Issues

General:

Parole grant/revocation