Legal Opinion
Hamilton v. City of San Bernardino
District Court, C.D. California
Decided July 7, 2004No. ED CV 00-107-RTPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF LA FRANCE HAMILTON’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION AS TO THE FOURTH CLAIM IN HIS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
TIMLIN, District Judge.
The court, Judge Robert J. Timlin, has read and considered plaintiff La France Hamilton (“Plaintiff’)’s motion for summary adjudication (“motion”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) (“Rule 56”) as to the fourth claim in his second amended complaint (“SAC”); 1 defendants City of San Bernardino (“City”) and Stephen Jarvis (“Jarvis”) (collectively “Defendants”)’ opposition; and Plaintiffs reply. 2 Based on such consideration,…
2Cases cited25 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
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D., William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. EstesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Darren David Chaker v. Alan Crogan San Diego Probation Department People of the State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- State v. CrawleyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- Chaker v. CroganCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- L.A. Police Protective League v. City of L.A.California Supreme Court · 2026
- L.A. Police Protective League v. City of L.A.California Court of Appeal · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.