Jane Doe v. Daniel Fitzgerald

Good Law
102 F.4th 1089
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 24, 202422-56216California6,943 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ikuta, J.

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JANE DOE, Nos. 1-10, No. 22-56216

Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:20-cv-10713- v. MWF-RAO

DANIEL S. FITZGERALD,

OPINION

Defendant-Appellant,

US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW

YORK,

Real-party-in-interest- Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Michael W. Fitzgerald, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted March 29, 2024 Pasadena, California

Filed May 24, 2024 Before: Ronald M. Gould, Sandra S. Ikuta, and Danielle J. Forrest, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge Ikuta

SUMMARY *

Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act

The panel affirmed the district court’s order staying proceedings in an action under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act pending the resolution of a criminal action. Ten plaintiffs sued Daniel Fitzgerald under the civil remedy provision of the TVPRA, 18 U.S.C. § 1595(a), for multiple sex trafficking violations, among other things. The government intervened and moved to stay the litigation pending the…

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.