Legal Opinion
Adams v. County of Sacramento
District Court, E.D. California
Decided May 12, 2023No. 2:22-cv-01499Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ----oo0oo---- 11 12 KATE ADAMS, No. 2:22-cv-01499 WBS KJN 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL1 15 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, a political subdivision of the 16 state of California; SHERIFF SCOTT JONES in his individual 17 and official capacity as Sheriff of the County of Sacramento, and 18 DOES 1-10, 19 Defendants. 20 21 ----oo0oo---- 22 Plaintiff moves for certification of the court’s March 23 27, 2023 Order (Docket No. 32) for interlocutory appeal pursuant 24 to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Eng v. CooleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- McKinley v. City of EloyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Couch v. Telescope Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- In Re Cement Antitrust Litigation (Mdl No. 296). State of Arizona v. Ideal Basic Industries, State of Arizona v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona, and Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corporation, Real Parties in Interest. State of Arizona v. Ash Grove Cement CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Ray B. WoodburyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.