Doe

Doe v. County of Sacramento

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 20232:21-cv-01438California1,045 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

||PORTER SCOTT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION John R. Whitefleet, SBN 213301 2180 Harvard Street, Suite 500 Sacramento, California 95815 TEL: 916.929.1481

FAX: 916.927.3706

5 Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO COUNTY || SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, and DARRYL RODERICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 MARIA DOE, a fictitious name; CLARA CASE NO. 2:21-cv-01438-MCE-CKD 10 || DOE, a fictitious name, and “I.D.” a fictitious name, by and through her next STIPULATION TO MODIFY friend, MARIA DOE, PROTECTIVE ORDER 12 Plaintiffs, Hon. Carolyn K. Delaney 13 14 || COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO;

SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF’S

16 |) OFFICE; DARRYL RODERICK; JAGDEEP SINGH; individually and as administrator of the estate of Sushma Giri; 18 || V & N ASSOCIATES, LLC and ALIDA

ESTRADA,

19 Defendants. Plaintiffs and Defendants County of Sacramento, Sacramento County Sheriffs Office, and Darryl Roderick and Defendants Estate of Sushma Giri and Jageep Singh, jointly submit…

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.