Legal Opinion
Grenning v. Klemme
District Court, E.D. Washington
Decided July 22, 2014No. CV-12-0600-JLQPublishedCited by 95 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STAY; GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT TO IDENTIFY JOHN DOES
JUSTIN L. QUACKENBUSH, Senior District Judge.
BEFORE THE COURT are Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment *1150(ECF No. 56); Plaintiffs Motion to Stay-Summary Judgment Until Completion of Discovery Pursuant to Rule 56(d) (ECF No. 64); and Plaintiffs Motion to Amend Complaint to Identify John Does (ECF No. 61). For the reasons that follow, Defendants’ Motion is granted in part and certain claims are dismissed while…
2Cases cited57 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Pearson v. CallahanSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by95 opinions
- Weston J. Stow v. Dr. Anne DavisDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2022
- (PC) Alejandro v. HuizareDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
- (PC) Alexander v. GarzaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- (PC) Anglin v. PrattiDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019
- (PC) Arrant v. SantoroDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2024
90 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.