SCHWARTZ v. LASSEN COUNTY, 2:10-cv-03048-MCE-CMK. (2013)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20130821942
Visitors: 6
Filed: Aug. 20, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 20, 2013
Summary: ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge. In Plaintiff's supplemental brief, submitted in response to the Court's Minute Order (ECF No. 137), Plaintiff cites to Reyes ex rel. Reyes v. City of Fresno, 2013 WL 2147023 (E.D. Cal. 2013). In Reyes, the court found a First Amendment familial deprivation claim duplicative of a Fourteenth Amendment familial deprivation claim. Plaintiff states that "Plaintiff does not argue with this legal analysis. Heretofore, the claims were pled together,
Summary: ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge. In Plaintiff's supplemental brief, submitted in response to the Court's Minute Order (ECF No. 137), Plaintiff cites to Reyes ex rel. Reyes v. City of Fresno, 2013 WL 2147023 (E.D. Cal. 2013). In Reyes, the court found a First Amendment familial deprivation claim duplicative of a Fourteenth Amendment familial deprivation claim. Plaintiff states that "Plaintiff does not argue with this legal analysis. Heretofore, the claims were pled together, b..
More
ORDER
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.
In Plaintiff's supplemental brief, submitted in response to the Court's Minute Order (ECF No. 137), Plaintiff cites to Reyes ex rel. Reyes v. City of Fresno, 2013 WL 2147023 (E.D. Cal. 2013). In Reyes, the court found a First Amendment familial deprivation claim duplicative of a Fourteenth Amendment familial deprivation claim. Plaintiff states that "Plaintiff does not argue with this legal analysis. Heretofore, the claims were pled together, but this analysis seems to indicate that they are duplicative."
The parties are ordered to submit a supplemental response clarifying for the Court: 1) whether the First and Fourteenth Amendment claims are duplicative, and 2) whether the parties stipulate to the dismissal of the First Amendment claim on that ground. The parties shall not provide any additional legal authority or make any legal arguments. Rather, the parties shall clearly and concisely, in one paragraph or less, answer the two questions stated above.
The parties' responses shall be submitted to the Court by 5:00 on August 20, 2013.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
