Kaye

(PC) Hill v. Kaye

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 30, 20231:22-cv-00929California1,410 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CYMEYON HILL, Case No. 1:22-cv-00929-JLT-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE

v. (Doc. No. 52) DAVID B. KAYE, Defendant. 16 Pending before the Court is the Defendant’s motion for the Court to take judicial notice. (Doc. No. 52). Plaintiff did not file any opposition and the time to do so has expired. See Local Rule 230(l) (opposition to a motion in a prisoner action must be filed within twenty-one (21) days after the date of service of the motion). For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Defendant’s request for judicial notice. Federal Rule of Evidence 201 permits a court to take judicial notice of facts that are “not subject to reasonable dispute” because they are either “generally known within the trial court's territorial jurisdiction,” or they “can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid.…

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.