Quiroz v. Horel
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; REFERRING CASE TO SETTLEMENT PROCEEDINGS
(Docket Nos. 267, 291)
LUCY H. KOH, District Judge
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a third amended complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, arguing that prison official defendants violated his federal and state law rights. Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment.1 Defendants have also filed a supplemental brief. (Docket No. 290.) Plaintiff has filed an opposition.2 Defendants have filed a reply. Having carefully considered the papers submitted,…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- 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
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- (PC) Deegan v. State of CaliforniaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- (PC) Henderson v. LizzaragaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- (PC) Sage v. DawsonDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- (PC) Thornberry v. KernanDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- (PC) Thornberry v. KernanDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.