Mary Starks v. County of Los Angeles
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
Case 2:21-cv-05209-ODW-GJS Document Filed 09/12/ Page 1 of Page ID #:1123
O
2 3 4 5 6 7 United States District Court 8 Central District of California 9 10 11 MARY STARKS, individually and as Case № 2:21-cv-05209-ODW (GJSx) successor in interest to Decedent RICKIE
STARKS,
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’
13 Plaintiff, MOTION TO DISMISS [37] 14 v. 15 16 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Defendants.
18 I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Mary Starks, individually and as successor in interest to Decedent 21 Rickie Starks, brings this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Defendants County of Los 22 Angeles (“County”), Sheriff Alex Villanueva, Deputy Taylor Ingersoll, and Deputy 23 Edwin Barajas. Defendants now move to dismiss Starks’s First Amended Complaint 24 (“FAC”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6). (Mot. 25 Dismiss (“Motion” or “Mot.”), ECF No. 37; FAC, ECF No. 24.) Having carefully 26 considered the papers filed in connection with the Motion, the Court deemed the 27 matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; C.D. Cal. 28 L.R.…