(PS) Bryan v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 20232:21-cv-02340California5,473 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENT M. BRYAN, No. 2:21-cv-2340 TLN AC PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER and TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AGENCY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and the case was accordingly referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21). Following an initial scheduling hearing that took place on June 29, 2022 (ECF No. 13), defendants moved for partial judgment on the pleadings and partial summary judgment, such that all claims will be resolved. ECF No. 15. Defendants filed their memorandum at ECF No. 16 and a request for judicial notice at ECF No. 17. Plaintiff opposes the motion. ECF No. 22. Defendants replied and submitted a supplemental request for judicial notice. ECF Nos. 20, 21. Plaintiff filed a surreply (ECF No. 23) to which defendants object (ECF No. 24). The court, in its discretion, considers the surreply in an effort to ensure all arguments are fully considered.…

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.