Neel

Neel v. County of San Diego

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaAugust 13, 20193:18-cv-01764California5,855 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 ELIZABETH NEEL, et al., Case No.: 18-CV-1764 W (MSB)

Plaintiffs,

ORDER:

v. (1) GRANTING IN PART AND COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et al.,

DENYING IN PART AMY

Defendants. MEIDINGER’S MOTION TO

DISMISS [DOC. 33]; AND

(2) GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART THE COUNTY

OF SAN DIEGO’S MOTION TO

DISMISS [DOC. 34]

19 Pending before the Court are two motions to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) filed by Defendants Amy Meidinger and County of San Diego. [Docs. 33, 34.] The Court decides the matter on the papers submitted and without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART both motions. // // // // I. BACKGROUND The Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) alleges the following facts. (SAC [Doc. 32].) Plaintiffs David and Elizabeth…

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.