Docstoc

16 Declination Form

Document Sample
16 Declination Form Powered By Docstoc
					Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 16-1 Filed 01/08/2007 Page 21of 21 Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 12 Filed 01/10/2007 Page of
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID F. JADWIN, Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner(s), vs. CASE NO. 1:07−CV−00026−OWW−LJO JENNIFER ABRAHAM, ET AL., Defendant(s)/Respondents(s).

IMPORTANT IF YOU CHOOSE TO CONSENT OR DECLINE TO CONSENT TO JURISDICTION OF A UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, CHECK AND SIGN THE APPROPRIATE SECTION OF THIS FORM AND RETURN IT TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE.

CONSENT TO JURISDICTION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE In accordance with the provisions of Title 28, U.S.C Sec. 636(c)(1), the undersigned hereby voluntarily consents to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of final judgment, with direct review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in the event an appeal is filed. Date: ___________________ Signature: _______________________________ Print Name: ______________________________
( ) Plaintiff/Petitioner ( ) Defendant/Respondent

( ) Counsel for *___________________________

XX

DECLINE OF JURISDICTION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to Title 28, U.S.C. Sec 636(c)(2), the undersigned acknowledges the availability of a United States Magistrate Judge but hereby declines to consent. Date: ___________________ January 10, 2007 Signature: _______________________________

Eugene D. Lee Print Name: ______________________________
( ) Plaintiff/Petitioner ( ) Defendant/Respondent

(XX ) Counsel for *___________________________ Plaintiff DAVID F. JADWIN

*If representing more than one party, counsel must indicate name of each party responding.


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: David F. Jadwin v. Kern County: 1:07-cv-26 in the United Stated District Court for the Eastern District of California, Fresno Division before Judge Oliver W. Wanger. This was a 2009 federal employment lawsuit that went to a bench and jury trial resulting in a unanimous verdict and significant judgment for the plaintiff employee. Issues involved violations of medical leave and disability discrimination laws, as well as 42 U.S.C. 1983 procedural due process violation. Plaintiff was represented by Eugene Lee, a Los Angeles, California employment lawyer.