Vincent C White v. California Community Colleges et al
Case Number: 2:2005cv00588
Filed: January 24, 2005
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Victor B. Kenton
Presiding Judge: Christina A. Snyder
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 3, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 57 MINUTES OF Motion Hearing held before Judge Christina A. Snyder: On 10/6/2008, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint Pursuant to F.R.C.P. Rules 41 and 12(b)(6), or, in the Alternative, Motion for a More Definite Statement Pursuant to F.R.C.P. Rule 12(e) 52 . The Court GRANTS defendant's motion to dismiss as to plaintiff's first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and tenth claims with leave to amend. The Court further GRANTS defendant's motion to dismiss as to plaintiff's sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth claims without leave to amend because the College is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. The Court further DENIES defendant's motion for a more definite statement. Plaintiff shall file a second amended complaint curing the defects noted herein within 30 days after the filing of this order. Failure to file a timely second amended complaint may result in dismissal of this action with prejudice. Court Reporter: Laura Elias. (gk)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Vincent C White v. California Community Colleges et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?