(PC) Haney v. Adams et al, No. 1:2007cv01104 - Document 122 (E.D. Cal. 2012)

Court Description: ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's Motion for Clarification and Amended Caption of Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations Re Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 115 , 120 , signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/21/12. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
(PC) Haney v. Adams et al Doc. 122 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 MONTE L. HANEY, 10 CASE NO. 1:07-cv-01104-AWI-SMS (PC) Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION and AMENDING CAPTION OF ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ADAMS, et al., 13 Defendants. (Docs. 115, 120) 14 / 15 16 Plaintiff Monte Haney (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 17 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on July 18 5, 2007 and is proceeding on the First Amended Complaint filed on July 16, 2008. 19 On March 19, 2012, a Findings and Recommendation regarding Defendants’ motion for 20 summary judgment issued. (Doc. 89.) On November 29, 2012, an order adopting it issued. (Doc. 21 115.) The caption in that order adopting reflected the case name as “Monte Haney v. Richard E. 22 Early, et al..” (Id.) The is the first and only instance that the name “Richard E. Early” has been on 23 any order or pleading in this matter. On December 12, 2012, Plaintiff filed an ex parte motion 24 inquiring whether, Richard E. Early was a new defendant in the case, whether Derral G. Adams was 25 still a defendant, or if some form of mistake had occurred. (Doc. 120.) 26 The name “Richard E. Early” erroneously appeared in the caption of the order adopting via 27 a mere clerical error. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a), clerical mistakes may be 28 corrected whenever discovered. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s ex parte motion for clarification, filed December 12, 2012 (Doc. 2 120), is hereby GRANTED and the caption of the order adopting the findings and recommendation 3 on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 115) is amended to reflect the case name of 4 “Monte Haney v. Adams, et al.” 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: 0m8i78 December 21, 2012 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.