Archer

Archer v. Gipson

Good Law

108 F. Supp. 3d 895·2015 WL 3562742·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69292

United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 28, 2015Case No. 1:12-CV-00261-LJO-JLTCalifornia10,612 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lawrenceneill, J.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT.

Before the Court in the above-styled and numbered cause of action is Defendant Jill *898 Gipson, Joseph Burke, and J.E. Burke Construction, Inc.’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment, filed March 3, 2015. (Doc. 72). Plaintiffs Darrell Archer and Keitha Darquea filed their Opposition on March 30, 2015 (Doc. 74), and Defendants filed objections (Docs. 79 & 80) on April 10, 2015. The matters are appropriate for resolution without oral argument. See Local Rule 230(g). Having considered the record in this case, the parties’ briefing, and the relevant law, the Court will grant in part and deny in part Defendants’ motion.

BACKGROUND

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The following relevant facts come primarily from Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (Doc. 4); Archer’s declaration (“Arch. Decl.”) (Doc. 76): Darquea’s declaration (“Darq. Decl.”) (Doc. 77); Defendants’ Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts (“SSUMF”) (Doc. 72-2); Defendant Gipson’s deposition (“Gip. Depo.”) and declaration (“Gip. Decl.”) (Doc. 72-3), as well as the Photographic Evidence…

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.