(PS) Lull v. County of Placer et al, No. 2:2019cv02444 - Document 18 (E.D. Cal. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 11/30/2020 ADOPTING 15 Findings and Recommendations in full. The 11 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as follows: a. All claims against Placer County are DISMISSED with prejudice, and the C ountyis TERMINATED as a defendant; b. All claims against the individual defendants are construed as individual capacity claims only, and any punitive official capacity claims are DISMISSED with prejudice; c. Claim Two (substantive due process) is DISMISSED with prejudice; d. Claims One, Three, Four and Five are DISMISSED with leave to amend; e. Any amendment as allowed by this order should include the procedural history of the subject abatement proceedings; and identification of the precise dates of the nuisance abatement hearing, the order of abatement, the "imposition of fine," and any related official acts asserted as bases for liability; f. Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file an Amended Complaint within 21 days of this order; g. This matter is REFERRED back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial proceedings. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
(PS) Lull v. County of Placer et al Doc. 18 Case 2:19-cv-02444-KJM-AC Document 18 Filed 11/30/20 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER LULL, 12 13 No. 2:19-cv-02444 KJM AC PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF PLACER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action in pro per. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(21). On April 13, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 20 served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings 21 and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Plaintiff has filed objections to 22 the findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 24 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the 25 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 27 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 13, 2020 are adopted in full; 28 2. The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 11, is GRANTED as follows: 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:19-cv-02444-KJM-AC Document 18 Filed 11/30/20 Page 2 of 2 1 a. All claims against Placer County are dismissed with prejudice, and the County 2 is terminated as a defendant; 3 b. All claims against the individual defendants are construed as individual 4 capacity claims only, and any punitive official capacity claims are dismissed with 5 prejudice; 6 c. Claim Two (substantive due process) is dismissed with prejudice; 7 d. Claims One, Three, Four and Five are dismissed with leave to amend; 8 e. Any amendment as allowed by this order should include the procedural history 9 of the subject abatement proceedings; and identification of the precise dates of the 10 nuisance abatement hearing, the order of abatement, the “imposition of fine,” and 11 any related official acts asserted as bases for liability; 12 f. Plaintiff is directed to file an Amended Complaint within 21 days of this order; 13 and 14 g. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further 15 pretrial proceedings. 16 DATED: November 30, 2020. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.