Borden

Borden v. Bare

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 12, 20221:20-cv-01103California996 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CHLOE PSALM JERI BORDEN, CASE NO. 1:20-cv-01103-AWI-EPG

Plaintiff,

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTION

v. AND REQUEST TO STRIKE

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR

DEPUTY ETHAN BARE; DEPUTY SUMMARY JUDGMENT

JEREMY MALICOAT,

11 Defendants. (Doc. No. 24)

14 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Chloe Psalm Jeri Borden’s Objection and Request to 15 Strike Defendants Deputy Ethan Bare and Deputy Jeremy Malicoat’s Motion for Summary 16 Judgment (Doc. No. 24). 17 Plaintiff argues that Defendants’ motion for summary judgement violated Local Rule 18 133(j) and therefore should be stricken because Defendants failed to lodge paper or electronic 19 complete copies of the depositions referenced in their motion “prior to or upon the filing of” their 20 motion.1 Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment on May 2, 2022 (Doc. No. 23) and 21 their notice of lodging deposition transcripts on May 3, 2022 (Doc. No.25). In response, 22 Defendants contend that their motion for summary judgment should not be…

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.