Angelica R. Untalan v. Warren A. Stanley

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaOctober 15, 20202:19-cv-07599California6,593 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

O

44 55 66 United States District Court 77 Central District of California 88 99 ANGELICA R. UNTALAN, Case No. 2:19-cv-07599-ODW-(JEMx) 1100 Plaintiff, 1111 v. ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 1122 DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ WARREN A. STANLEY, et al., MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON 1133 THE PLEADINGS [45] Defendants. 1144 1155 I. INTRODUCTION 1166 Before the Court is a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (the “Motion”) by 1177 Defendants Warren A. Stanley, Joseph Farrow, Tariq D. Johnson, Jonathan Cochran, 1188 Joseph Zagorski, Justin Vaughan, and Paola Trinidad (collectively “Defendants). 1199 (Mot. J. on Pleadings (“Mot.”), ECF No. 45.) On September 9, 2019, Plaintiff 2200 Angelica R. Untalan initiated this action against Defendants. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) 2211 On May 20, 2020, Defendants filed this Motion, which the parties have now fully 2222 briefed. (See Mot.; Opp’n to Mot. (“Opp’n Mot.”), ECF No. 50; Reply in Supp. Mot. 2233 (“Reply”), ECF No. 51.) For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS IN PART 2244 AND…

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.