Pierson

Pierson v. Martinelli

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaApril 29, 20203:19-cv-01755California3,251 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 CHRISTINA PIERSON and Case No. 19-cv-1755-BAS-KSC BRANDON BOLIC,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

Plaintiffs, AND DENYING IN PART

MOTION TO DISMISS

v. [ECF No. 11] JANICE E. MARTINELLI and

JANICE MARTINELLI AS

TRUSTEE OF THE JANICE

MARTINELLI TRUST DATED

JUNE 27, 2005,

Defendants.

19 Defendants Janice E. Martinelli and Janice Martinelli as Trustee of the Janice Martinelli Trust Dated June 27, 2005 bring this Motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), alleging a lack of standing, and under Rule 12(b)(6), alleging insufficient facts to support Plaintiffs’ claims of discrimination based on sex or disability. Alternatively, Defendants move for a more definite statement under Rule 12(e). (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiffs filed an Opposition to the Motion (ECF No. 13) and Defendants filed a Reply in support of the Motion (ECF No. 14.) The Court finds this Motion suitable for determination on the papers and without oral…

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.