Wolfe

Wolfe v. George

Good Law

385 F. Supp. 2d 1004·2005 WL 2060279·2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18285

United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 22, 2005C 00-1047 SBA, Nos. 264, 276, 285California8,738 words

Opinion

Armstrong, J.

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket No. 264] and Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Docket No. 276]. Having read and considered the arguments presented by the parties in the papers submitted to the Court, and having heard the argument of Plaintiff and Defendants’ counsel at the June 28, 2005 hearing, the Court hereby DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and GRANTS Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.

BACKGROUND

A. Procedural Background.

On March 27, 2000, Plaintiff Burton Wolfe (“Plaintiff’), filed a Complaint, in propria persona, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , challenging the constitutionality of Califor nia’s Vexatious Litigant Statute. He named as defendants: (1) Justice Gary Strankman, Chief Justice Ronald George, Deborah Silva, the Judicial Council of California, and State of California (collectively known as the “State Defendants”); and (2) Judge Alfred Chiantelli, Judge David Garcia, and Judge Ronald Quidachay (collectively known as the “Judge Defendants”).

On March 29, 2002, this Court dismissed Plaintiffs Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure…

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.