Garrison

Garrison v. Ringgold

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaAugust 26, 20193:19-cv-00244California818 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TOMMY GARRISON, an individual, Case No.: 19cv244-GPC(RBB) and CHRISTINE GARRISON, an 12 individual , ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS/COUNTERDEFENDANTS’ Plaintiffs,

MOTION TO DISMISS

14 v. COUNTERCLAIM AS UNOPPOSED AND DENYING

REGINALD BUDDY RINGGOLD, III

PLAINTIFFS/COUNTERDEFENDANTS’

aka Rasool Abdul Rahim El, an

REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES

individual, ROSEGOLD 17 INVESTMENTS, LLP, a Delaware [Dkt. No. 20.] Partnership, and MASTER INVESTMENT GROUP, INC., a 19 California Corporation, 20 Defendants.

22 Before the Court is Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants’ motion to strike and dismiss the 23 counterclaims raised by Defendant/Counterclaimant against them. (Dkt. No. 20.) 24 Defendant did not file an opposition. On August 6, 2019, in reply, Plaintiffs asked the 25 Court to grant the motion in its entirety as unopposed pursuant to S.D. Local Civil Rule 26 7.1(f)(3)(c). (Dkt. No. 23.) Based on the reasoning below, the Court…

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.