We are checking for the latest updates in this case. We will email you when the process is complete.

Ortiz Vs Thomas

Case Last Refreshed: 2 years ago

Ortiz, Christopher, filed a(n) Harassment - Torts case represented by Childers, Troy L, against Thomas, Luke Edward, in the jurisdiction of Kern County. This case was filed in Kern County Superior Courts with Katz, Steven presiding.

Case Details for Ortiz, Christopher v. Thomas, Luke Edward

Filing Date

February 27, 2009

Category

43-Ch Civil Harassment - Civil Unlimited

Last Refreshed

November 20, 2021

Practice Area

Torts

Filing Location

Kern County, CA

Matter Type

Harassment

Case Cycle Time

165 days

Parties for Ortiz, Christopher v. Thomas, Luke Edward

Plaintiffs

Ortiz, Christopher

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Childers, Troy L

Defendants

Thomas, Luke Edward

Case Events for Ortiz, Christopher v. Thomas, Luke Edward

Type Description
Hearing Substitution of Attorneys
OLD ATTORNEY: DIANE MEDINA/VOLUNTEER ATTORNEY GBLA NEW ATTORNEY: IN PRO PER
Docket Event Substitution of Attorneys
OLD ATTORNEY: DIANE MEDINA/VOLUNTEER ATTORNEY GBLA NEW ATTORNEY: IN PRO PER
Hearing Rejection/Correction Notice
ON SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY FILED 8/6/09: LINE 2C AND 2D ARE INCOMPLETE (VIA AMS)
Docket Event Rejection/Correction Notice
ON SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY FILED 8/6/09: LINE 2C AND 2D ARE INCOMPLETE (VIA AMS)
Hearing Rejection/Correction Notice
TO: TROY L CHILDERS ESQ RE: NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD IS A FAMILY LAW FORM; CIVIL CASES REQUIRE SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY FORM; COURT ADDRESS IS INCORRECT
Docket Event Rejection/Correction Notice
TO: TROY L CHILDERS ESQ RE: NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD IS A FAMILY LAW FORM; CIVIL CASES REQUIRE SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY FORM; COURT ADDRESS IS INCORRECT
Hearing NP1821
Department: 17 Calendar Notes: NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: RULING ON: PETITION AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE IN RE: HARASSMENT; HERETOFORE SUBMITTED ON 5/14/2009. *************************************************************************************** THE COURT REACHES THE FOLLOWING DECISION: PETITION RE HARASSMENT DENIED. THERE IS NO CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT DEFENDANT LUKE EDWARD THOMAS IS A THREAT TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTOPHER ORTIZ. COPY OF MINUTE ORDER MAILED TO ALL PARTIES AS STATED ON ATTACHED DECLARATION.
Docket Event NP1821
Department: 17 Calendar Notes: NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: RULING ON: PETITION AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE IN RE: HARASSMENT; HERETOFORE SUBMITTED ON 5/14/2009. *************************************************************************************** THE COURT REACHES THE FOLLOWING DECISION: PETITION RE HARASSMENT DENIED. THERE IS NO CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT DEFENDANT LUKE EDWARD THOMAS IS A THREAT TO PLAINTIFF CHRISTOPHER ORTIZ. COPY OF MINUTE ORDER MAILED TO ALL PARTIES AS STATED ON ATTACHED DECLARATION.
Hearing NP1835
Department: 17
Hearing NP1620
Department: 17 Calendar Notes: NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: PETITION AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE IN RE: HARASSMENT. AMENDED MINUTE ORDER. DUE TO CLERICAL ERROR THIS MINUTE ORDER AMENDED ON 5/22/2009 BY M. MILLER TO CORRECT ERROR IN COURT'S ORDERS. THE ABOVE ENTITLED CAUSE CAME ON REGULARLY AT THIS TIME TODAY FOR HEARING WITH PARTIES AND COUNSEL PRESENT AS FOLLOWS: CHRISTOPHER ORTIZ (PL-1) APPEARS WITH TROY L CHILDERS ESQ. LUKE EDWARD THOMAS (DE-1) APPEARS WITH DIANE M MEDINA. *************************************************************************************** MATTER TO BE HEARD WITH RELATED CASE CV-266509. JOINT MOTION TO EXCLUDE WITNESSES IS GRANTED. PLAINTIFF IS DULY SWORN AND TESTIFIES. EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY PLAINTIFF. THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES ARE DULY SWORN AND TESTIFY ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF: AMANDA THOMAS. DEFENDANT IS DULY SWORN AND TESTIFIES. EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY DEFENSE. THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES ARE DULY SWORN AND TESTIFY ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT: KERN COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTY JOSEPH MALLEY AND CHRISTINA ORTIZ. COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF MAKES CLOSING ARGUMENTS. COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENSE MAKES CLOSING ARGUMENTS. THE COURT MAKES THE FOLLOWING ORDERS: PREVIOUSLY ISSUED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER IS TO REMAIN IN EFFECT AS TO PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT ONLY. TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDERS ISSUED DO NOT APPLY TO THE CHILDREN IN THESE MATTERS. DEFENDANT AND PLAINTIFF ORDERED TO REMAIN 50 YARDS AWAY FROM ANOTHER. PLAINTIFF IS PERMITTED TO CARRY HIS FIREARM FOR EMPLOYMENT PURPOSES ONLY. COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT TO PREPARE RESTRAINING ORDER PENDING COURT'S RULING. EXHIBIT LIST ATTACHED AND MADE A PART HEREOF. CAUSE HEARD AND SUBMITTED. CAUSE STANDS SUBMITTED.
See all events