D.B. and S.B. v. Ingrid Brewer et al
| D.B. and S.B. |
| Aspiranet, Ingrid Brewer, County of Los Angeles, DOES, Renee Marshall, Patricia McQueen, Rabia Mirza and Edmund Paik |
| 2:2017cv01651 |
| March 1, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Rozella A. Oliver |
| Christina A. Snyder |
| P.I.: Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
73
PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver re Stipulation for Protective Order 72 (dml)
|
|
Filing
53
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Christina A. Snyder RE: Defendant Aspiranet's Motion to Dismiss 27 ; Defendant Aspiranet's Motion to Strike 30 ; Defendants County of Los Angeles, Renee Marshall, Rabia Mirza, and Edmund Paik's Motion t o Dismiss 35 . The Court DENIES Aspiranet's motion to strike portions of the First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). The Court DISMISSES without prejudice plaintiffs' Section 1983 claim against Aspiranet. The Court DISMISSES without pre judice plaintiffs' third claim for breach of duty arising from a special relationship as against all defendants. To the extent that plaintiffs' claims against Aspiranet rely on the allegation that Aspiranet is a "public entity" wi thin the meaning of Section 811.2 or that Aspiranet is subject to "mandatory duties" pursuant to Section 815.6, the Court DISMISSES such claims without prejudice. Aspiranet's motion to dismiss the FAC for failure to comply with Rule 8 is DENIED. The Court DISMISSES without prejudice all of plaintiffs' claims against Paik and Marshall. The Court DENIES the County defendants' motion to dismiss all claims against Mirza. The Court DENIES the County defendants' motion to dismiss to the extent the motion is predicated on various theories of immunity. The Court DISMISSES without prejudice plaintiffs' first claim for "public entity liability" as against the County. However, the Court DENIES the County de fendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' first claim as against Mirza. The Court DENIES the County defendants' motion to dismiss the Section 1983 claim as against Mirza. The Court DISMISSES without prejudice the Section 1983 claim as against the County. Court Reporter: Not Present. (gk)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
