Wright

Wright v. Dunne

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 20202:15-cv-02671California9,442 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6 7 JACOB WRIGHT, KHRYSTYNE No. 2-15-cv-02671-TLN-CKD 8 WRIGHT and JONATHAN WRIGHT, as successors in interest of DANIEL LEE WRIGHT (deceased); JACOB WRIGHT, individually; KHRYSTYNE WRIGHT, ORDER DENYING IN PART AND individually; and JONATHAN WRIGHT, GRANTING IN PART WITH LEAVE TO individually, AMEND DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO

DISMISS AND MOTION FOR JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs, ON THE PLEADINGS. 13 v.

AMBER DUNNE; DR. JOHN PONDER;

DANA M. KERNAN; DR. SHELDON

SUSKAUER; DR. PAULA NEWMAN;

DR. SCOTT A. HEATLEY; DAVID

SMILEY; JOE A. LIZARRAGA; DOE 1;

AND DOE 2,

Defendants. 19 20 This matter is before the Court on Defendants Dana M. Kernan (“Kernan”) and Joe A. Lizarraga’s (“Lizarraga”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) (ECF No. 33) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6) and Defendants Amber Dunne (“Dunne”), Dr. John Ponder (“Ponder”), Dr. Sheldon Suskauer (“Suskauer”), Dr. Paula Newman (“Newman”), Dr. Scott…

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.