Shaw v. City of Portola, et al.

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

The Court not found any such case and therefore finds Plaintiff has cited a nonexistent case. 6 Plaintiff fails to address Boyd in her reply despite Defendants directing Plaintiff’s attention to the error, ECF No. 24, pg. 4. Plaintiff instead asserts that “Plaintiff has not cited fictitious cases and there is no basis to infer bad faith from correctable citation defects. ” ECF No. 26, pg. 12. The Court agrees that any correctable citation defects do not necessarily indicate bad faith nor warrant sanctions, as previously addressed herein. However, Plaintiff declined to address the fictitious citation to Boyd despite Defendants raising the issue. Plaintiff had the opportunity to make the necessary corrections to her Boyd citation or take accountability for citing a nonexistent case, but instead claimed she “has not cited fictitious cases.

Authorities cited in the passage: Plaintiff used an incorrect pinpoint citation to People v. Dang, citing page 1305 though the published opinion ends at page 1300, and relied on D · Boyd v. City of San Diego, 14 Cal.App.4th 954, 959-960 (1993) · Plaintiff initially cited State of Nevada v. US Dept. of Energy with incorrect reporter information · Nevada v. United States Dep't of Energy, 133 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 1998) · Plaintiff relied on Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp., 337 U.S. 682 (1949) to support the proposition that courts void or enjoin ultra