Strickland
Strickland v. Ujiri
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6 ALAN STRICKLAND AND KELLY STRICKLAND, Case No. 20-cv-981-YGR 7 Plaintiffs, ORDER DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON MOTION TO DISMISS v. COUNTERCLAIMS; VACATING HEARING 9 10 M SPA OS RA TI S U &JI ERI N; T T EO RR TO AN INT MO E R NA TP ; T NO AR TS I; O M NAA LP LE LEAF
DKT. NO.
11 BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION, Defendants. 13 Pending before the Court is the motion of plaintiff Alan Strickland to dismiss the 14 counterclaims of defendants Masai Ujiri and Toronto Raptors/Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment. 15 (Dkt. No. 45.) In evaluating the pending motion, the Court requires further briefing on a narrow 16 scope of issues regarding the California Tort Claims Act (“CTCA”). 17 It is not plain from the face of the pleadings here who employed Strickland at the time of 18 the incident. The exhaustion requirements of the CTCA apply to a “a cause of action against a 19 public employee or former public employee for injury resulting from an act or omission in the 20 scope of his employment as a public…