Christopher Meza v. Daniel Quidort

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 20245:23-cv-01379California3,320 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 O 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHRISTOPHER MEZA, ) Case No. EDCV 23-01379 DDP (SHKx) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING OFFICER DEFENDANTS’ v. ) MOTION TO DISMISS ) DANIEL QUIDORT, ) ) Defendants. ) ___________________________ ) 16 Presently before the court is Defendants Daniel Quidort and Trent Tunstall (collectively, the “Officer Defendants”)’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. Having considered the submissions of the parties and heard oral argument, the court denies the motion and adopts the following Order. I.Background In 2016, Plaintiff Christopher Meza and the mother of his child, Defendant Tanya Karakesisoglu (“Karakesisoglu”), were engaged in a custody dispute. (Complaint ¶¶ 1, 18.) During the course of that dispute, Meza alleges that Karakesisoglu threatened to accuse him of rape if he did not agree to her custody demands. (Id.) On September 20, 2016, Karakesisoglu suggested that Meza meet with her…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.