Legal Opinion
Fiorentino v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company
District Court, E.D. California
Decided December 9, 2024No. 1:24-cv-01023Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HEIDI FIORENTINO, Case No. 1:24-CV-01023-KES-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PARTIAL LEAVE TO AMEND 13 v. (Doc. 4) 14 PHILIDELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 19 Defendant Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company (“PIIC”) moves to dismiss all 20 claims in plaintiff Heidi Fiorentino’s complaint. Doc. 4. Fiorentino filed an opposition and PIIC 21 replied. Docs. 11, 13. This matter is suitable for resolution without a hearing pursuant to Local 22 Rule 230(g). For…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Jena Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department Al Olsen, Police Chief, Individually and as a Police AgentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. Donald Lawrence Ritchie, Heather Horner, Claimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.