Nathan Cooley v. County of Los Angeles

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 15, 20232:23-cv-01809California605 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

Case 2:23-cv-01809-DMG-AFM Document Filed 03/15/ Page 1 of Page ID #:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. CV 23-1809-DMG (AFMx) Date March 15, 2023

Title Nathan Cooley v. County of Los Angeles, et al. Page 1 of

Present: The Honorable DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

KANE TIEN NOT REPORTED

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s) Attorneys Present for Defendant(s) None Present None Present

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS—ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER

JURISDICTION

On March 10, 2023, pro se Plaintiff Nathan Cooley filed a Complaint in this Court against Defendants County of Los Angeles and the Honorable Lisa Sepe-Wiesenfeld, Mark Young, and Bobbi Tillmon, judges of the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Compl. at 2 [Doc. # 1]. In his Complaint, Cooley asserts both federal question and diversity jurisdiction. Id. at 3.

On its face, the Complaint reveals that this Court does not have diversity jurisdiction because all…

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.