Lull v. County of Sacramento
District Court, E.D. California
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 Autotek Inc. and Christopher Lull, No. 2:16-cv-01093-KJM-CKD 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER 13 Vv. 14 County of Sacramento, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiffs move for reconsideration of the court’s July 20, 2020 order granting summary 18 | judgment to the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD). See generally Prior Order, ECF 19 | No. 90. The motion for reconsideration is fully briefed and the court submitted it without a 20 | hearing. See Opp’n, ECF No. 100; Reply, ECF No. 106; Minute Order, ECF No.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Marlyn Nutraceuticals, Inc. v. Mucos Pharma GmbH & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- 389 Orange Street Partners v. ArnoldCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Tollis, Inc. v. County of San DiegoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- McCoy v. CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, USA, NATIONAL ASS'NCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011