From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farley v. Hall

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 5, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1789 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 5, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-1789 FCD GGH P.

May 5, 2008


ORDER


On October 3, 2007, the court found that plaintiff's complaint stated a colorable Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Hall. The court dismissed plaintiff's retaliation claim with thirty days to file an amended complaint. Thirty days passed and plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. Accordingly, on March 19, 2008, the court recommended that the retaliation claim be dismissed.

On April 10, 2008, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. Plaintiff states that he did not receive the October 3, 2007, order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The March 19, 2008, findings and recommendations are vacated;

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to re-serve plaintiff with the October 3, 2007, order.


Summaries of

Farley v. Hall

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 5, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1789 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 5, 2008)
Case details for

Farley v. Hall

Case Details

Full title:LIONEL FARLEY, Plaintiff, v. L. HALL, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: May 5, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-07-1789 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 5, 2008)