Jayantibhai Patel et al v. City of Long Beach et al

Filing 209

FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: Upon Stipulation 206 , the Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES and DECREES that Judgment shall be entered in favor of Plaintiffs Jayantibhai Patel dba Princess Inn and Daksha Patel and against Defendant City of L ong Beach. Defendant City of Long Beach shall pay Plaintiffs Jayantibhai Patel dba Princess Inn and Daksha Patel the total sum of $7,500 as damages for the violation of their Fourth Amendment rights to be paid within 45 days of Entry of Judgment . Plaintiffs are deemed the prevailing party for the purposes of determination of the award for reasonable attorney's fees as part of the costs available under 42 U.S.C. section 1988. Notwithstanding the designation as "prevailing party,&qu ot; the date of recovery of Plaintiffs attorney's fees or costs in this case is cut-off as of 1/30/2017. After 1/30/2017, the parties shall bear their own attorney's fees and costs. Any motion to determine the amount of attorney's fees and costs, including any motion to determine attorney's fees for the Plaintiffs' previous appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Docket No. 09-56699, shall be served and filed no later than 90 days after Entry of Judgment. See document for further details. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (gk)

1

JS-6

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
CHARLES PARKIN, City Attorney
333 West Ocean Boulevard, 11th Floor
Long Beach, CA 90802-4664

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA -- WESTERN DIVISION

14
15
16
17
18

Honorable Andre Birotte, Jr.

Plaintiffs,

12
13

Case No.: CV 08-02806-AB (GJSx)

JAYANTIBHAI PATEL, et al.,

FINAL JUDGMENT

vs.
CITY OF LONG BEACH, a municipal
corporation, and DOES 1-10, Inclusive,
Defendant.
Based on the Stipulation by and between Plaintiffs JAYANTIBHAI PATEL,

19

dba PRINCESS INN and DAKSHA PATEL ("Patels") and Defendant CITY OF

20

LONG BEACH ("City"), that:

21

The Patels, together with the City, by and through their authorized

22

representatives, have entered into a Stipulation for Entry of Final Judgment,

23

consenting to this entry of this Final Judgment, and reserving preserving the Patel's

24

right to appeal the Court's November 15, 2016, Minute Order wherein the Court

25

determined Plaintiffs pled no Fourth Amendment basis for their state law claims,

26

and because the record could support no such claim, the Ninth Circuit’s order did

27

not affect Plaintiffs’ dismissed state law claims, providing no reason for their

28

reinstatement, in this matter and this Final Judgment.
1

FINAL JUDGMENT

1

The Court finds that:

2

1.

On April 29, 2008, City employees took several of the Patels motel

3

registry slips for photocopying; and in seizing the slips, the City employees acted

4

intentionally and the seizure was unreasonable;

5

2.

The City employees acted under color of state law under Long Beach

6

Municipal Code 5.48.010, which included subdivision (E) that allowed police

7

officers and other City financial officials to inspect certain guest registry

8

information upon demand, without a warrant or consent. Such inspections have been

9

found to be pursuant to an unconstitutional official policy and a violation of the
Fourth Amendment under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 for which the City of Long Beach

11
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
CHARLES PARKIN, City Attorney
333 West Ocean Boulevard, 11th Floor
Long Beach, CA 90802-4664

10

is responsible;

12

3.

Plaintiffs JAYANTIBHAI PATEL, dba PRINCESS INN and DAKSHA

13

PATEL are deemed the prevailing parties for the purpose of determination of the

14

award for reasonable attorney’s fees as part of the costs available under 42 U.S.C.

15

section 1988. Notwithstanding the designation as “prevailing party”, the date of

16

recovery of Plaintiffs attorney’s fees or costs in this case is cut-off as of January 30,

17

2017. After January 30, 2017, the parties shall bear their own attorney’s fees and

18

costs; and

19

4.

Plaintiffs JAYANTIBHAI PATEL, dba PRINCESS INN and DAKSHA

20

PATEL oppose this Court's ruling of November 15, 2016, wherein it was determined

21

the Patel’s pled no Fourth Amendment basis for their state law claims, and because

22

the record could support no such claim, the Ninth Circuit’s order did not affect

23

Plaintiffs’ dismissed state law claims, providing no reason for their reinstatement.

24

(Doc 123). The Patels reserve and preserve their right to appeal this adverse ruling

25

pursuant to this mutual settlement for consideration reached by the Patels and the

26

City, which expressly preserves the Patels right to appeal this adverse ruling.

27

///

28

Therefore, the Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES and DECREES:
2

FINAL JUDGMENT

1

1.

Judgment shall be entered in favor of Plaintiffs JAYANTIBHAI PATEL,

2

dba PRINCESS INN and DAKSHA PATEL and against Defendant CITY OF LONG

3

BEACH;

4

2.

Defendant CITY OF LONG BEACH shall pay Plaintiffs

5

JAYANTIBHAI PATEL, dba PRINCESS INN and DAKSHA PATEL the total sum

6

of Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars as damages for the violation of their

7

Fourth Amendment rights to be paid within forty-five days of Entry of Judgment;

8
9

3.

Plaintiffs JAYANTIBHAI PATEL, dba PRINCESS INN and DAKSHA

PATEL are deemed the prevailing party for the purposes of determination of the

award for reasonable attorney’s fees as part of the costs available under 42 U.S.C.

11
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
CHARLES PARKIN, City Attorney
333 West Ocean Boulevard, 11th Floor
Long Beach, CA 90802-4664

10

section 1988. Notwithstanding the designation as “prevailing party”, the date of

12

recovery of Plaintiffs attorney’s fees or costs in this case is cut-off as of January 30,

13

2017. After January 30, 2017, the parties shall bear their own attorney’s fees and

14

costs;

15

4.

Any motion to determine the amount of attorney’s fees and costs,

16

including any motion to determine attorney's fees for the Plaintiffs' previous appeal

17

to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Docket No. 09-56699,

18

shall be served and filed no later than ninety days after Entry of Judgment. (L.R. 54-

19

10);

20

5.

Pursuant to this Court’s Final Judgment and the mutual settlement for

21

consideration reached by the parties, which expressly preserves the Patels right to

22

appeal this Court’s adverse ruling that determined the Patel’s pled no Fourth

23

Amendment basis for their state law claims, and because the record could support no

24

such claim, the Ninth Circuit’s order did not affect Plaintiffs’ dismissed state law

25

claims, providing no reason for their reinstatement; Plaintiffs JAYANTIBHAI

26

PATEL dba PRINCESS INN and DAKSH PATEL reserve and preserve their right

27

to appeal the November 15, 2016 ruling. (Doc. 123); and

28
3

FINAL JUDGMENT

1

6.

The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter for purposes of

2

enforcing this Final Judgment;

3

///

4

DATED: June 7, 2018

5
6

By:
André Birotte Jr., Judge
United States District Court

7
8
9
10

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
CHARLES PARKIN, City Attorney
333 West Ocean Boulevard, 11th Floor
Long Beach, CA 90802-4664

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4

FINAL JUDGMENT