Sterling

Housing Rights Center v. Sterling

Good Law
404 F. Supp. 2d 1179·2004 WL 3609630
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 2, 2004CV 03-859DSF(EX)California7,374 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fischer, J.

ORDER DENTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

This case arises out of allegations that Defendants racially discriminated against their tenants in violation of federal law. The Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, for Partial Summary Judgment against Plaintiff Jeffrey High (“Motion”), Separate Statement of Uncontroverted Facts and Conclusions of Law (“SUF”), Declarations of Joanne Lichtman, Harley Choi and Brian J. Kramer and Request for Judicial Notice were filed April 23, 2004. The Opposition, Statement of Genuine Issues (“Response” and “Genuine Issues”) , Declarations of Anny Kim, Dixie Martin and Jeffrey High, Submission of Documentary Evidence, and Appendix of Non-California Authorities were filed May 10, 2004. The Reply, Declarations of Craig Hubble and Robert H. Platt, Supplemental Declaration of Harley Choi and Objections to Evidence were filed May 17, 2004.

The Court heard oral argument on May 24, 2004. For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES the Motion for Summary Judgment.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

Summary judgment is appropriate when “the pleadings,' depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file,…

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.