Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

REESE v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, 2:13-cv-559-GEB-KJN. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160608711 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jun. 07, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 07, 2016
Summary: ORDER AMENDING JUDGMENT GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior District Judge . On June 2, 2016 judgment was entered in this lawsuit (ECF No. 217) but the order directing the Clerk's Office to enter judgment failed to include the Court's prior summary judgment ruling on Plaintiff Robert I. Reese's Fourth Amendment municipal liability claim against Defendant County of Sacramento, and the jury's verdict on Reese's claims against Defendant Deputy Duncan Brown. Therefore the following amended judgmen
More

ORDER AMENDING JUDGMENT

On June 2, 2016 judgment was entered in this lawsuit (ECF No. 217) but the order directing the Clerk's Office to enter judgment failed to include the Court's prior summary judgment ruling on Plaintiff Robert I. Reese's Fourth Amendment municipal liability claim against Defendant County of Sacramento, and the jury's verdict on Reese's claims against Defendant Deputy Duncan Brown. Therefore the following amended judgment shall enter:

Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant Deputy Zachary Rose on Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claim since Rose prevails on his qualified immunity defense. Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant Brown on Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claim since the jury's verdict filed on November 6, 2015 found Brown was not liable. (Jury Verdict 1:17-19, ECF No. 164.) Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant County of Sacramento on Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment municipal liability claim since the order filed on July 17, 2015 summarily adjudicated this claim in favor of the County. (Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defs.' Mot. for Summ. J. 3:12-14, ECF No. 69.) Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant Rose, Defendant County of Sacramento, and Defendant Brown on Plaintiff's Bane Act claim. Judgment is entered against Defendant Rose and Defendant County of Sacramento on Plaintiff's battery claim. Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant Brown on Plaintiff's battery claim since the jury found Brown was not liable. (Jury Verdict 1:23-25.) Plaintiff is awarded $350,000.00 for past non-economic loss, $150,000.00 for future non-economic loss, and $13,165.00 for past medical expenses for a total of $513,165.00 in compensatory damages.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer