Peterson

Peterson v. Sutter Medical Foundation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 10, 20233:21-cv-04908California5,396 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 RALPH PETERSON, Case No. 3:21-cv-04908-WHO

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR

v. ATTORNEY FEES

SUTTER MEDICAL FOUNDATION, et Re: Dkt. No. 118 al., 11 Defendants.

12 Two defendants in this case, Sutter Bay Medical Foundation and Sutter Bay Hospitals, filed a motion for attorney fees arising from their anti-SLAPP motion to strike, which I previously granted. For the reasons that follow, their motion is granted and they are awarded attorney fees, though the total amount is reduced from what they initially request. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Ralph Peterson filed this case against various defendants and, as relevant here, defendants Sutter Bay Medical Foundation and Sutter Bay Hospitals (the “Sutter Defendants”) filed a motion to dismiss all claims and a motion to strike the state law claims under California’s anti-SLAPP law. [Dkt. Nos. 80, 82]. I granted the motion to strike in full and the motion to …

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.