Cruz

Cruz v. City of San Diego

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaFebruary 24, 20253:24-cv-00287California7,435 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ELIZABETH CRUZ, HILARINO Case No.: 24-cv-00287-AJB-MSB

APARICIO,

12 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND v.

DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS’

14 CITY OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, a MOTIONS TO STRIKE AND FOR A Municipal Corporation; et al., MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT Defendants. 16 (Doc. No. 24) 17 18 Presently before the Court is Defendants City of San Diego (the “City”), Chief David Nisleit, Sergeant Matthew Ruggiero, Officer Jeremy Avalos, and Officer Jonah Tafoya’s (collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Elizabeth Cruz and Hilarino Aparicio’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 12(b)(6). (Doc. No. 24.) In the alternative, Defendants move for a more definite statement under Rule 12(e). (Id.) Defendants also seek to strike portions of Plaintiffs’ FAC which they allege are impertinent, immaterial, and scandalous under Rule 12(f). (Id.)…

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.