Vena

Vena v. Moore, Schulman & Moore, APC

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaDecember 20, 20243:22-cv-00437California8,744 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 NICHOLAS A VENA, Case No.: 3:22-cv-0437-W-BLM

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

v. SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION [DOC. 83] AND GRANTING MOORE, SCHULMAN & MOORE,

DEFENDANTS’ SUMMARY

APC, et al. JUDGMENT MOTION [DOC. 86] Defendants. 18 19 Pending before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment/adjudication. The Court decides the matters on the papers submitted and without oral argument. Civ. L.R. 7.1(d.1). For the reasons that follow, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for summary adjudication [Doc. 83] and GRANTS Defendants’ motion for summary judgment [Doc. 86]. // // // 28 I. BACKGROUND This lawsuit arises out of an underlying state court marital-dissolution proceeding between Plaintiff Nicholas A. Vena and Christine Vena before a privately compensated temporary judge, Commissioner Jeannie Lowe (Ret.). During the child-custody trial, 5 …

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.