Legal Opinion
Wallisa v. City of Hesparia
District Court, C.D. California
Decided March 20, 2019No. Case No. ED CV 16-2638 FMO (KKx)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge
Having reviewed and considered all briefing filed with respect to the Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. 101, "Joint Br."), filed by Jonathan Flores ("Flores"), Spencer Wilt ("Wilt"), Kent Watson ("Watson"), and the County of San Bernardino ("County") (collectively, "defendants"), the court finds that oral argument is not necessary to resolve the Motion, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 78 ; Local Rule 7-15; Willis v. Pac. Mar. Ass'n, 244 F.3d 675, 684 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2001), and concludes as follows.
BACKGROUND
Amb…
2Cases cited84 opinions
- 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- (PS) Hanible v. County of Solano Sheriff's OfficeDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
- Applegate v. BainesDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2025
- Estate of Ronnie Kong v. City of San DiegoDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2023
- L.F. v. City of StocktonDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
- Payne v. City of EugeneDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2024
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.