Rose

Rose v. City of Suisun City

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 2, 20252:21-cv-02214California2,166 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 NICKOLAS G. ROSE, No. 2:21-cv-02214-DAD-CKD Plaintiff, v. ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE

CITY OF SUISIN CITY, et al., PLEADINGS Defendants. (Doc. No. 42) 16 17 This matter is before the court on the motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by defendant City of Suisun City (“defendant City”) on October 11, 2024. (Doc. No. 42.) For the reasons explained below, the court will grant the motion for judgment on the pleadings and enter judgment in defendant City’s favor. BACKGROUND On September 3, 2021, plaintiff Nickolas G. Rose filed a complaint in the Solano County Superior Court initiating this tort lawsuit against defendants Suisun City, Amtrak, and unnamed Doe defendants 1–10. (Doc. No. 1 at 1.) Defendant City removed the action to this federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1349. (Id. at 1–2.) On December 8, 2021, defendant City filed a…

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.