(PS) Rogers v. County of Sacramento

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 20252:24-cv-00475California1,274 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PAULA CARRIE ROGERS, No. 2:24-cv-00475-TLN-CKD Plaintiff, v. ORDER COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendant. 16 Plaintiff Paula Carrie Rogers (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302(c)(21). On December 20, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 45.) On January 2, 2025, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 46.) Defendant County of Sacramento and Defendants City of Elk Grove, Bobby Davis, Tina Durham, and Tisha Smith (the “City Defendants”) filed replies. (ECF Nos. 47, 48.) This court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which…

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.