Hill

Hill v. Alpine Sherriff Department

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaOctober 22, 20193:18-cv-02470California2,243 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PERCY HILL also known as Case No.: 18cv2470-CAB-MDD

PERCY EDWIN STOCKTON,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR v. RULE 37 SANCTIONS AGAINST

PLAINTIFF

ALPINE SHERIFF

15 DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants. [ECF No. 22] 17 On January 30, 2019, Plaintiff Percy Hill (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed the operative Second Amended Complaint against Defendants County of San Diego, Eric Garcia, Cathy Allister, Freddy Herrero, Matthew Addenbrooke, and Officer Balinger (collectively, “Defendants”). (ECF No. 8, hereinafter “SAC”). On September 9, 2019, Defendants County of San Diego, Eric Garcia, Cathy Allister, Freddy Herrero, and Matthew Addenbrooke (collectively, “moving Defendants”)1 filed the instant motion for sanctions 25 26 against Plaintiff pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37. (ECF No. 22, hereinafter “Mtn”). Plaintiff filed an untimely opposition on October 11, 3 …

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.