Adree Edmo v. Corizon, Inc., et al
| Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals | |
| Case #: | 0:19-pr-35017 |
| Type | prisoner / state / civil rights |
| Nature of Suit | 550 Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus - Civil Rights |
| Case Filed: | Jan 10, 2019 |
| Terminated: | Aug 23, 2019 |
|
Al Ramirez
|
|
|
Henry Atencio
|
|
|
Howard Keith Yordy
|
|
|
Idaho Department of Corrections
|
|
|
Jeff Zumda
|
|
|
Richard Craig
|
|
|
Rona Siegert
|
|
Amicus Curiae
Andrea Armstrong
|
|
Amicus Curiae
Civil Rights and Non-Profit Organizations
|
|
Amicus Curiae
Former Corrections Officials
|
|
Amicus Curiae
Jody L. Herman
|
|
Amicus Curiae
Medical and Mental Health Professional Organizations
|
|
Appellant
Catherine Whinnery
|
|
Appellant
Corizon, Inc.
|
|
Appellant
Murray Young
|
|
Appellant
Scott Eliason
|
|
Appellee
Adree Edmo
|
GPO
Aug 23 2019
FILED PER CURIAM OPINION (M. MARGARET MCKEOWN, RONALD M. GOULD and ROBERT S. LASNIK) We accordingly DENY the Stateâ??s motion to dismiss and proceed to the merits of the appeal (SEE OPINION FOR FULL TEXT). Costs on appeal are awarded to Edmo. AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED. FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [11407843] [19-35017, 19-35019] |
|
|
GPO
Feb 10 2020
Filed Order for PUBLICATION (M. MARGARET MCKEOWN, RONALD M. GOULD and ROBERT S. LASNIK) The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. A judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of nonrecused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed R. App. P. 35. The petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED. An opinion respecting denial of rehearing en banc, prepared by Judge Oâ??Scannlain, and dissents from denial of rehearing en banc prepared by Judge Collins and Judge Bumatay are filed concurrently with this order. [11590647] [19-35017, 19-35019] |
| 1. | Court To Rule On Sex Reassignment Surgery For Idaho Inmate (npr.org) |
| Submitted Thu 05/16/2019 | |
| Docket last updated: 11/25/2019 1:40 PM PST |
| Thursday, January 10, 2019 | ||
| 1 | 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: to be set. Preliminary Injunction Appeal. C.R. 3-3. [11147991] (RT) [Entered: 01/10/2019 09:17 AM] | |
|
Att: 1
1 pgs
Docketing Letter
|
||
|
Att: 2
1 pgs
Mediation Letter
|
||
|
Att: 3
22 pgs
Case Opening Packet
|
||
| 2 | 2
2
pgs
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: TSP): The appeal filed January 9, 2019 is a preliminary injunction appeal. Accordingly, Ninth Circuit Rule 3-3 shall apply. The mediation questionnaire is due three days after the date of this order. If they have not already done so, within 7 calendar days after the filing date of this order, the parties shall make arrangements to obtain from the court reporter an official transcript of proceedings in the district court that will be included in the record on appeal. The briefing schedule shall proceed as follows: the opening brief and excerpts of record are due not later than February 6, 2019; the answering brief is due March 6, 2019 or 28 days after service of the opening brief, whichever is earlier; and the optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. See 9th Cir. R. 3-3(b). No streamlined extensions of time will be approved. See 9th Cir. R. 31-2.2(a)(3). Any request for an extension of time to file a brief must be made by written motion under Ninth Circuit Rule 31-2.2(b). Failure to file timely the opening brief shall result in the automatic dismissal of this appeal by the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [11149085] (AF) [Entered: 01/10/2019 03:51 PM]
|
|