Roe

Roe v. Grossmont Union High School District

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMarch 6, 20203:19-cv-01966California3,489 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROE, a minor, by and through her Case No.: 19-CV-1966-CAB-BGS Guardian ad Litem, JUSTIN SLAGLE,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

Plaintiff, DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ v. MOTION TO DISMISS AND STRIKE

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

GROSSMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL

15 DISTRICT et al., [Doc. No. 15] 16 Defendants.

18 This matter comes before the Court on a motion to dismiss and strike Plaintiff’s complaint filed by Defendants Grossmont Union High School District, April Baker, Josh Reiderer, Robin Ballarin, and Michael Falcomer (collectively “Defendants”). [Doc. No. 15.] The motion has been fully briefed, and the Court deems it suitable for determination on the papers submitted and without oral argument. See S.D. Cal. CivLR 7.1(d)(1). For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Roe, a minor and freshman at West Hills High School in Santee, California, by and…

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.