(PS) Stephens v. County of Sacramento Dept of Human Assistance of Northern California Welfare Division

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 20192:16-cv-01849California5,348 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 REHEMA STEPHENS, No. 2:16-cv-1849-JAM-EFB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

14 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN

15 ASSISTANCE OF NORTHERN

CALIFORNIA WELFARE DIVISION,

16 Defendant. 17

18

19 20 This case was before the court on February 27, 2019 for hearing on the sole defendant 21 County of Sacramento’s (hereafter “County”) motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 35) and 22 the court’s November 16, 2018 order directing plaintiff to show cause why sanctions should not 23 be imposed for her failure to timely respond to the County’s motion (ECF No. 36).1 Attorney 24 Glen Williams appeared on behalf of the County, and plaintiff appeared pro se. For the following 25 reasons, the order to show cause is discharged and it is recommended that the County’s motion be 26 granted. 27 1 This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C.…

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.