Bowen

Bowen v. M. Caratan, Inc.

Good Law
142 F. Supp. 3d 1007·2015 WL 6703584·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149006
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 2, 2015Case No. 1:14-CV-00397-LJO-JLTCalifornia12,931 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lawrenceneill, J.

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

Before the Court in the above-styled and numbered cause of action is Defendants M. Caratan, Inc.’s, doing business as Columbine Vineyards (“Columbine,” or “Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment, filed July 22, 2015. (Doc. 15). Plaintiff Janet Bowen (“Plaintiff,” or “Bowen”) filed her Opposition on August 17, 2015' (Doc. 17), and Defendants filed a' Reply oh August 25, 2015 (Doc. 19). The motion is appropriate for resolution without oral argument. See Local Rule 230(g). Having considered the record in this case, the parties’ briefing, and the l-elevant law, the Court will deny Defendants’ motion.

BACKGROUND

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The following relevant’ facts come primarily from Plaintiffs Complaint (“Compl.,” Doc. 1); the parties’ Joint Statement of Undisputed Material Facts (“JSUMF,” Doc. 15-3). Defendants’ Separate Statement of Úncontroverted [Material] Facts (“DSSUMF,” 15-2); Plaintiffs Response to Defendants’ Statement of Undisputed [Material] Facts”. (“PRSUMF,” Doc. 17-16); Plaintiff Janet Bowen’s Declaration (Doc. 17-1) and Deposition (Doc. 17-II, Ex. 8); the depositions of relevant…

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.