(PS) Hill v. City of Sacramento

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 20, 20222:22-cv-01625California6,280 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ARNITHA HILL, et al., No. 2:22-cv-01625 DAD AC (PS) Plaintiffs, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CITY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Arnitha Hill is proceeding in this matter pro se, and pre-trial proceedings are accordingly referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Although the complaint names several other individuals as plaintiffs (Diana Fields, Anthony Ganderson, Brejonna Ganderson, Montreal Ganderson, Unique Fields, and Marlo Hill), only Arnitha Hill has signed the complaint. ECF No. 1 at 14. Accordingly, she is the only plaintiff to have appeared. Defendant City of Sacramento, the only defendant to have appeared,1 moves to dismiss the case. ECF No. 5. Plaintiff opposed the motion (ECF No. 8) and defendants replied (ECF No. 12). The matter came before the court for hearing on December 7, 2022 with all parties present. //// 26 The remaining defendants have not been served. See…

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.