Filed: Jan. 05, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 05, 2015
Summary: JUDGMENT ON JURY VERDICT JAMES V. SELNA, District Judge. This action came on for trial on December 10, 2014 in Courtroom 10C of the United States District Court, the Hon. James V. Selna, presiding. The plaintiffs appeared by attorney Adam Krolikowski, and the defendants appeared by attorney Gregg M. Audet, Deputy City Attorney. A jury of 8 persons was regularly impaneled and sworn. Witnesses were sworn and testified. After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, the jury was duly instr
Summary: JUDGMENT ON JURY VERDICT JAMES V. SELNA, District Judge. This action came on for trial on December 10, 2014 in Courtroom 10C of the United States District Court, the Hon. James V. Selna, presiding. The plaintiffs appeared by attorney Adam Krolikowski, and the defendants appeared by attorney Gregg M. Audet, Deputy City Attorney. A jury of 8 persons was regularly impaneled and sworn. Witnesses were sworn and testified. After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, the jury was duly instru..
More
JUDGMENT ON JURY VERDICT
JAMES V. SELNA, District Judge.
This action came on for trial on December 10, 2014 in Courtroom 10C of the United States District Court, the Hon. James V. Selna, presiding. The plaintiffs appeared by attorney Adam Krolikowski, and the defendants appeared by attorney Gregg M. Audet, Deputy City Attorney.
A jury of 8 persons was regularly impaneled and sworn. Witnesses were sworn and testified. After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, the jury was duly instructed by the Court and the cause was submitted to the jury with directions to return a special verdict. The jury deliberated and thereafter returned into Court with its verdict as follows:
QUESTION 1
Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that an individual defendant violated Perez' Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force against plaintiff Perez? Answer separately as to each individual defendant.
Defendant Salicos ___ Yes ✓ No
Defendant Craig ___ Yes ✓ No
QUESTION 2
Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that an individual defendant was negligent? Answer separately as to each individual defendant.
Defendant Salicos ___ Yes ✓ No
Defendant Craig ___ Yes ✓ No
QUESTION 5
Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that an individual defendant violated Perez' rights under the Bane Act? Answer separately as to each individual defendant.
Defendant Salicos ___ Yes ✓ No
Defendant Craig ___ Yes ✓ No
QUESTION 11 Case 8:13-cv-01609-JVS-DFM Document 71 Filed 01/05/15 Page 3 of 4 Page ID #:569
Did defendant Craig sustain bodily injuries caused by the wrongful acts of plaintiff Perez during the arrest of plaintiff Perez?
✓ Yes ___ No
QUESTION 12
Did Anaheim pay workers' compensation benefits to defendant Craig as a result of injuries caused by Plaintiff Perez?
✓ Yes ___ No
QUESTION 13
What are counterclaimant Anaheim's damages?
a. Past economic loss
Workers' compensation benefits paid.
$ 2761.52
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that: Plaintiffs take nothing by their complaint filed herein on October 15, 2013; Defendant City of Anaheim is awarded $2,761.52 in damages on its counterclaim; and Defendants City of Anaheim, Stephen Craig and Stephen Salicos have and recover from Plaintiffs their costs to be awarded at a later date.
