Bell v. Lee
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 8, 20233:13-cv-05820California3,746 words
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 VINCENT KEITH BELL, Case No. 13-cv-05820-SI
Plaintiff,
ORDER: GRANTING IN PART AND
v. DENYING IN PART MOTION TO
DISMISS SAC; GRANTING
KEN LEE, et al., DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO REOPEN
DISCOVERY; RE-SETTING
Defendants. PRETRIAL DATES
Re: Dkt. Nos. 195, 205, 207, 208
13 Defendant City and County of San Francisco (the “City”) has moved to dismiss plaintiff Vincent Bell’s second cause of action (42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Monell Liability and Supervisory Liability against the City and County of San Francisco) from the second amended complaint. Dkt. No. 195. The City also moves to re-open discovery to allow it to gather additional information related to the Monell claim. Dkt. No. 205. The parties have raised various other discovery disputes that they wish the Court to resolve. Dkt. No. 207. These matters came on for hearing on September 8, 2023. 21 …