Neel
Neel v. County of San Diego
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…