Ricky Ray v. State Farm Mutual Insurance

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 21, 202120-55989California865 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 21 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RICKY RAY, individually and as successor No. 20-55989 in interest to Cynthia Ray, deceased; et al., D.C. No. Plaintiffs-Appellants, 2:19-cv-04922-DSF-MAA

v.

MEMORANDUM*

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 19, 2021** Pasadena, California

Before: CALLAHAN, OWENS, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiffs Ricky Ray, Morgan Howard, Alexis Grimm, Kourtnee Grimm, and

J.R. (collectively, the “Ray Family”) appeal from the district court’s summary

judgment in favor of defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Company (“State Farm”) in the Ray Family’s…

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.