Hutson

Hutson v. AMCO Insurance Co Inc

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 9, 20203:19-cv-03667California5,606 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JANICE HUTSON, et al., Case No. 19-cv-03667-EMC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

v. DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’

MOTIONS TO DISMISS SECOND

AMCO INSURANCE CO INC, et al., AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendants. Docket No. 30-

12 Plaintiffs are the heirs of a woman named Betty Hutson. They have sued two companies: AMCO Insurance Co. and Wells Fargo Bank, NA. Previously, AMCO answered the original complaint as well as the first amended complaint (“FAC”). See Docket No. 1-3 (answer); Docket No. 15 (answer). Wells moved to dismiss the FAC. The Court granted Wells’s motion but permitted the filing of a second amended complaint (“SAC”). Docket No. 18 (minutes). After Plaintiffs filed the SAC, both AMCO and Wells moved for dismissal. These are the motions currently pending before the Court.1 Having considered the parties’ briefs and accompanying submissions,2 as well as the oral argument of counsel, the Court…

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.