(PS) Hill v. City of Sacramento

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 2, 20242:22-cv-01625California528 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 DJC AC PS Plaintiffs, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CITY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiffs are proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). This case has been pending since September 16, 2022. ECF No. 1. Defendants moved to dismiss the initial complaint, and that complaint was dismissed with leave to amend. ECF Nos. 14, 15. Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. ECF No. 16. Defendants moved to dismiss the first amended complaint, and following a hearing on the motion, the first amended complaint was dismissed with partial leave to amend. ECF Nos. 28, 30. Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint. ECF No. 31. On February 16, 2024, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s second amended complaint, set to be heard on April 10, 2024. …

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.