Smith v. City of Stockton, 2:15-cv-00363-KJM-AC. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20170623815
Visitors: 4
Filed: Jun. 22, 2017
Latest Update: Jun. 22, 2017
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION & ORDER TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF AND DISMISS CHIEF OF POLICE ERIC JONES IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . Plaintiff NATHANIEL SMITH and Defendants CITY OF STOCKTON, OFFICER ROBIN HARRISON, OFFICER PATRICK MAYER, OFFICER MICHAEL PEREZ, and CHIEF OF POLICE ERIC JONES (also hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendants"), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, and subject to the approval of the Court, here
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION & ORDER TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF AND DISMISS CHIEF OF POLICE ERIC JONES IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . Plaintiff NATHANIEL SMITH and Defendants CITY OF STOCKTON, OFFICER ROBIN HARRISON, OFFICER PATRICK MAYER, OFFICER MICHAEL PEREZ, and CHIEF OF POLICE ERIC JONES (also hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendants"), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, and subject to the approval of the Court, hereb..
More
JOINT STIPULATION & ORDER TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF AND DISMISS CHIEF OF POLICE ERIC JONES IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY
KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.
Plaintiff NATHANIEL SMITH and Defendants CITY OF STOCKTON, OFFICER ROBIN HARRISON, OFFICER PATRICK MAYER, OFFICER MICHAEL PEREZ, and CHIEF OF POLICE ERIC JONES (also hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendants"), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, and subject to the approval of the Court, hereby stipulate as follows:
Defendants are presently planning on submitting a motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication as to Plaintiff's claims in this action. Pursuant to Judge Mueller's standing civil order, the parties met and conferred regarding Defendants' intended motion as required. The parties hereby agree to the following two items:
1) Plaintiff's second claim for relief, for intentionally and/or recklessly provoking a confrontation, against Officers Mayer and Perez (premised on 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the 4th and 14th Amendments), is no longer a viable claim for relief in light of the recent United States Supreme Court decision in County of Los Angeles, California, et al. v. Mendez, et al., 518 U.S. _______ (2017), 2017 U.S. LEXIS 3396 (May 30, 2017). Accordingly, Plaintiff hereby agrees to dismiss his second claim for relief with prejudice.
2) Plaintiff has named both the City of Stockton and Chief of Police Eric Jones in his official capacity as Defendants in this suit. Plaintiff's counsel agrees, pursuant to controlling case law, that both cannot be named as Defendants in this action, and hereby agrees to dismiss Chief Jones, in his official capacity only, from the action with prejudice. (Chief Jones is also named in his individual capacity as a Defendant, and Plaintiff's claims against Chief Jones in his individual capacity will be addressed in Defendants' motion.)
ORDER
The Court, having considered the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing, the Joint Stipulation to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Claim for Relief and Dismiss Chief of Police Eric Jones in his official capacity as a Defendant is GRANTED and all parties shall comply with its provisions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
