Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00399/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00399-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE S. LOUIE,

Plaintiff,

v.

SUSANNE ACENCIO, d/b/a STATE FARM

INSURANCE, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:08-cv-399-AWI GSA 

ORDER RE: EVIDENTIARY HEARING

On July 2, 2008, Chief District Court Judge Anthony Ishii referred Defendant's Motion to

Dismiss based on Vexatious Litigation to this court to conduct an evidentiary hearing. 

Accordingly, the evidentiary hearing will be held on Tuesday, September 9, 2008 at 10:00 am in

Courtroom 10. Pursuant to Judge Ishii's order, the parties shall present evidence regarding the

declarations filed by George Louie, (“Plaintiff”) and Ms. Raney regarding whether Ms. Raney

encouraged the plaintiff to file additional lawsuits against State Farm Insurance offices. 

 Additionally, the court notes that in Molski v. Evergreen Dynasty Corp., 500 F. 3d 1047,

1057 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F. 2d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir. 1990), the

Case 1:08-cv-00399-AWI -GSA Document 27 Filed 07/23/08 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

Ninth Circuit outlined four factors that district courts should use when imposing a pre-filing

order on a vexatious litigant. These factors are : 1) that Plaintiff be given notice and an

opportunity to be heard, 2) there is the creation of an adequate record, 3) that the court makes

findings of frivolousness or the harassment nature of the litigant’s actions, and 4) that the order

be narrowly tailored to prevent the litigant's abuse behavior. The parties are advised that the

evidence presented at the hearing shall focus on all of the elements of this test. In light of the

analysis in Molski, the court is especially interested in information regarding the contents of

Plaintiff’s complaints filed in other cases. Additionally, the court is interested in information

regarding what injuries Plaintiff has suffered as a result of the violations alleged in the complaint,

as well as any evidence related to damages resulting from those injuries. Molski v. Evergreen

Dynasty Corp., 500 F. 3d at 1056-1062. 

If the parties have a conflict with the time and date of this hearing, the parties are directed

to meet and confer and contact Jeannie Vasquez, Courtroom Deputy with a proposed date and

time for this hearing.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 23, 2008 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00399-AWI -GSA Document 27 Filed 07/23/08 Page 2 of 2