Gordon v. Stanford Medical Chief
- Jeffrey White
- 4:20-cv-01591
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Gordon v. Stanford Medical Chief, Judge Demarchi reassigned the case to a district judge because not all parties had consented to magistrate jurisdiction.
Terry Gordon and the defendants in the case, including the unserved defendants whose consent was required before a magistrate judge could decide the matter.
What happened
Terry Gordon, a state prisoner representing himself, sued Stanford Medical Chief and other defendants over emotional distress and physical harm allegedly incurred during transport from Stanford Hospital to Santa Rita Jail.
The order said Gordon had not alleged enough facts to state a valid claim against the Stanford Hospital chief, who was described as a private citizen. Because deciding claims against at least one defendant might dispose of those claims, and not all parties had consented to a magistrate judge, the case had to be reassigned.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi ordered the Clerk to reassign Gordon v. Stanford Medical Chief to a district judge under the court’s assignment plan. The order did not itself dismiss the case or decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Gordon v. Stanford Medical Chief · No. 4:20-cv-01591
- Jeffrey White
- Aug. 4, 2020
Background
Terry Gordon, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action against various defendants. He alleged that he suffered emotional distress and physical harm during transport from Stanford Hospital to the Santa Rita Jail. Gordon named the chief of Stanford Hospital as a defendant, but the order stated that he had not alleged facts sufficient to state a legally cognizable claim against that private citizen.
Reason for Reassignment
The court explained that all parties, including defendants who had not yet been served, must consent before a magistrate judge can hear and decide the case. Because the case appeared to require a decision disposing of claims against at least one defendant, and not all parties had consented to magistrate-judge jurisdiction, the matter had to be reassigned to a district judge.
Order
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi ordered the Clerk of Court to reassign the case to a district judge under the court’s assignment plan. This order reassigned the case; it did not itself dismiss the action or decide the merits of Gordon’s claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.