Arnold

Arnold v. Metlife Auto & Home Insurance Agency, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 12, 20195:19-cv-03920California3,599 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 MARIE A ARNOLD, Case No. 19-cv-03920-VKD

9 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING METLIFE

10 v. GROUP, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS

AMENDED COMPLAINT

11 METLIFE AUTO & HOME INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 32 12 Defendants.

13 14 Defendant MetLife Group, Inc. (“MetLife Group”) moves to dismiss all claims asserted 15 against it by plaintiff Marie A. Arnold. Dkt. No. 32. The Court held a hearing on the motion on 16 November 12, 2019. Upon consideration of the moving and responding papers, as well as the oral 17 arguments presented, the Court grants the motion to dismiss, and gives Ms. Arnold leave to file a 18 second amended complaint. 19 I. BACKGROUND 20 Ms. Arnold, proceeding pro se, originally filed this action against defendants MetLife Auto 21 & Home Insurance Agency, Inc. and MetLife Group, asserting claims for negligence and negligent 22 misrepresentation, as well as a claim under the Fourth Amendment…

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.