Amy

Amy v. Curtis

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 26, 20203:19-cv-02184California1,479 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

“AMY”, et al., Case No. 19-cv-02184-PJH Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR

RANDALL STEVEN CURTIS, RELIEF Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 117

13 Before the court is defendant Randall Curtis’s (“defendant”) motion for relief from nondispositive pretrial order of magistrate judge. Dkt. 117. The matters is fully briefed1 and suitable for decision without oral argument. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court rules as follows. On August 25, 2020, the parties filed a joint discovery letter to resolve three discovery disputes before Magistrate Judge Illman. Dkt. 94. The parties disputed whether defendant is entitled to obtain discovery on the issue of damages; whether defendant is entitled to obtain discovery regarding monies plaintiffs have sought and received for similar…

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.