Sacramento Homeless Union v. County of Sacramento

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 3, 20232:22-cv-01095California1,988 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SACRAMENTO HOMELESS UNION, et No. 2:22-cv-01095-TLN-KJN al., 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER v. 14 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Sacramento Homeless Union, Betty Rios, Donta Williams, and Falisha Scott’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”). (ECF No. 36.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiffs’ motion. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A full recitation of the factual background of this case is set forth fully in the Court’s prior order. (ECF No. 22.) In short, the instant case arises from Defendants’ alleged failure to discharge their duties during Sacramento’s triple-digit heat wave to protect the unhoused, one of society’s most vulnerable populations. (See ECF No. 1.) This case began on June 24, 2022, when Plaintiffs filed the operative complaint and a…

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.