Peterson

Peterson v. Sutter Medical Foundation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 6, 20233:21-cv-04908California8,028 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. SUMMARY JUDGMENT

SUTTER MEDICAL FOUNDATION, et Re: Dkt. No. 149 al., 11 Defendants.

12 Plaintiff Ralph Peterson filed this case against the defendants—Sutter Bay Medical Foundation and Sutter Bay Hospitals, as well as the three individual physicians Neil Stollman, Rod Perry, and Philip Rich—asserting various claims arising out of his resignation from employment with Sutter in April 2009. After several rounds of motions to dismiss, his remaining claims are for First Amendment and Due Process violations related to the disciplinary proceedings carried out by the defendants before Peterson’s resignation, as well as allegations concerning kickbacks that the defendants accepted but Peterson refused to accept. The defendants filed the pending motion for summary judgment on both of Peterson’s remaining claims. Because there is no genuine dispute of fact…

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.