Legal Opinion

Sikking v. Housing of Urban Development (HUD)

District Court, S.D. California

Decided February 1, 2021No. 3:19-cv-01004Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEFF SIKKING, et al. Case No.: 19CV1004-LAB (KSC) 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING IN PART 13 v. MOTIONS TO DISMISS; AND 14 RICHARDSON C. GRISWOLD, et ORDER DISMISSING CLAIMS al. 15 FOR LACK OF STANDING Defendants. 16 [DOCKET NUMBERS 30, 32.] 17 18 19 20 Defendant filed two motions (Docket nos. 30, 32) to dismiss the second 21 amended complaint (“SAC”) (Docket no. 27). When Plaintiffs submitted what 22 appeared to be multiple oppositions to each motion, the Court issued an order 23 requiring them to file a…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Younger v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. DoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API