Sikking
Sikking v. Housing of Urban Development (HUD)
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JEFF SIKKING, et al. Case No.: 19CV1004-LAB (KSC)
Plaintiffs,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
v. RECONSIDERATION OF
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
RICHARDSON C. GRISWOLD, et al. 15 Defendants.
17 In their motions to dismiss, Defendants raised the defenses of res judicata and collateral estoppel, and also asked the Court to abstain under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). Because the status of the state court nuisance action that these arguments referenced was not clear, the Court ordered Defendants to brief the status of the state court case. Specifically, the Court needed to know whether final judgment had been entered in that case. Defendant Richardson Griswold filed a response (Docket no. 100) making clear the state court action was still pending. On February 1, the Court issued an order granting in part the motions to dismiss, and giving Plaintiffs 28 calendar days to seek leave to file a third amended complaint. After …