Creighton

Creighton v. City of Livingston

Good Law
628 F. Supp. 2d 1199·2009 WL 1424929·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42197
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 19, 20091:08-cv-01507California10,887 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wanger, J.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (DOC. 10)

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Paul Creighton (“Creighton”) filed suit against his former employer, the City of Livingston, and former supervisor, Richard Warne (collectively “Defendants”), on September 2, 2008 in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced. On October 6, 2008, Defendants removed the action to this court based on federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 , 1441, and 1446. (Doc. 1, attaching Plaintiffs complaint as exhibit “A” and Defendants’ answer as exhibit “B”.)

Plaintiff alleges violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Plaintiff also asserts supplemental claims, including violation of article I, §§ 2 and 3 of the California Constitution, various California Labor Code violations, and wrongful termination in violation of public policy. (Doc. 1, Exhibit A at 12-17.)

Before the court for decision is Defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), or alternatively, to dismiss for…

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.