Sheehan v. City and County of San Francisco, C 09-03889 CRB. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20160429a53
Visitors: 14
Filed: Apr. 28, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 28, 2016
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION CHARLES R. BREYER , District Judge . Now before the Court is Defendants' motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration as to this Court's Order on Defendant's second motion for summary judgment. See Mot. (dkt. 110); Order re 2nd MSJ (dkt. 108). The Court GRANTS the motion in part and DENIES it in part. The Court's order omitted its ruling on punitive damages; the Court GRANTS summary judgment for Defendants on punitive
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION CHARLES R. BREYER , District Judge . Now before the Court is Defendants' motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration as to this Court's Order on Defendant's second motion for summary judgment. See Mot. (dkt. 110); Order re 2nd MSJ (dkt. 108). The Court GRANTS the motion in part and DENIES it in part. The Court's order omitted its ruling on punitive damages; the Court GRANTS summary judgment for Defendants on punitive d..
More
ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge.
Now before the Court is Defendants' motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration as to this Court's Order on Defendant's second motion for summary judgment. See Mot. (dkt. 110); Order re 2nd MSJ (dkt. 108). The Court GRANTS the motion in part and DENIES it in part. The Court's order omitted its ruling on punitive damages; the Court GRANTS summary judgment for Defendants on punitive damages. See Cal. Civ. Code § 3294; In re First Alliance Mortg. Co., 471 F.3d 977, 998 (9th Cir. 2006). The Court DENIES the motion for reconsideration as to the Bane Act claim.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
