Legal Opinion

Penrose Hill, Limited v. Mabray

District Court, N.D. California

Decided August 18, 2020No. 4:20-cv-01169Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 PENROSE HILL, LIMITED, et al., Case No. 20-cv-01169-DMR 7 Plaintiffs, ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION 8 v. FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AND SPECIAL MOTION 9 PAUL MABRAY, TO STRIKE 10 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 18 11 Plaintiffs Penrose Hill, Limited (“Penrose Hill”) and Philip James filed this action on 12 February 14, 2020, alleging a single state law claim for defamation against Defendant Paul Mabray. 13 [Docket No. 1 (“Compl.”).] Jurisdiction is based on diversity.1 Mabray now moves for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. Eminence Capital, Llc, and Jay Spechler v. Aspeon, Inc. Richard P. StackCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  5. Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990

41 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