Richter

Richter v. Ausmus

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 24, 20203:19-cv-08300-WHOCalifornia6,729 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JULIA RICHTER, Case No. 19-cv-08300-WHO

8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' 9 v. MOTION TO DISMISS

10 LISA AUSMUS, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 18 Defendants. 11

12 Plaintiff Julia Richter, an officer with the Oakland Police Department (“OPD”), brings this 13 action pro se against OPD employees Lisa Ausmus, Todd Mork, Sekou Millington, Anne 14 Kirkpatrick, Damon Gilbert, and Bryan Hubbard. She alleges multiple causes of action pursuant 15 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 stemming from defendants’ alleged failure to properly train defensive tactics, 16 which caused her injury, and defendants’ wrongful investigations in retaliation for her pursuit of 17 disability benefits and her testimony in federal court. She also brings causes of action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986 and California law. 19 There are a number of problems with Richter’s Amended Complaint. This Order identifies 20 in what ways Richter has failed to state any cause of action and allows…

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.