Diaz

Diaz v. City of Merced

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 12, 20241:23-cv-00065California1,302 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ARMANDO DIAZ, No. 1:23-cv-00065-JLT-SKO

Plaintiff, v. ORDER VACATING HEARING AND

GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW

The CITY OF MERCED, CODY MCCOMB, NICOLAS DEJON, (Doc. 17) DOMINIC SAELEE, and DOES 1-15, inclusive, 16 Defendant.

I. INTRODUCTION 21 Plaintiff Armando Diaz (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action on January 12, 2023, alleging he 22 was subject to excessive force by officers of the Merced Police Department acting under color of 23 law, in violation of the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1). On July 24, 2024, 24 William L. Schmidt of the law firm William L. Schmidt, Attorney at Law, P.C., (“Attorney 25 Schmidt”), attorney for Plaintiff, filed the instant motion to withdraw. (Doc. 17). Pursuant to 26 E.D. Cal. Local Rule 230(c), any opposition to the motion by or Defendants was due by August 7, 27 2024. 28 Defendants filed a statement of non-opposition on July 26, 2024 (Doc. 19) and…

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.