Jeremy Coltharp et al v. Herrera et al

Filing 79

JUDGMENT ON DEFENDANT, LARRY HERRERA'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORALTERNATIVELY FOR PARTIALSUMMARY JUDGMENT by Judge Andre Birotte, Jr, in favor of Larry Herrera against Edith Frazier: Defendant's Motion f or Summary Judgment, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 56, came on regularly for hearing on December 8, 2014, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 790 of the above-entitled court. After considering the papers filed in support of the motion, including the Se parate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting Evidence, the opposition and Statement of Disputed Material Facts, and the reply thereto, and the oral argument of counsel, the court finds that there exists no triable issue of material fact requiring the weighing process of the jury, and that the Defendant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. The Court ordered that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Court now orders that judgment be issued in Defendant's favor, with costs and attorney's fees to be awarded pursuant to a timely filed memorandum of costs and motion for attorney's fees. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (bm)

1

JS-6

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JEREMY COLTHARP, an individual,
EDITH FRAZIER, an individual,

12
13
14
15
16

Case No.: CV13-3263 AB (FFMx)
Honorable Andre Birotte, Jr.
Courtroom 790

Plaintiffs,

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT ON
DEFENDANT, LARRY
HERRERA’S OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR
ALTERNATIVELY FOR PARTIAL
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

vs.
LARRY HERRERA, in only his official
capacity as City Clerk for the City of
Long Beach, and DOES 1-5,
Defendant.

17

Date:
Time:
Ctrm.:

18
19

Complaint File: May 16, 2013
Trial Date:
Not Scheduled

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

December 8, 2014
10:00 a.m.
790

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule
56, came on regularly for hearing on December 8, 2014, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom
790 of the above-entitled court.
After considering the papers filed in support of the motion, including the
Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting Evidence, the
opposition and Statement of Disputed Material Facts, and the reply thereto, and the
oral argument of counsel, the court finds that there exists no triable issue of material

28
1

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT ON DEFENDANT, LARRY HERRERA’S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

1

fact requiring the weighing process of the jury, and that the Defendant is entitled to

2

a judgment as a matter of law. The Court ordered that Defendant’s Motion for

3

Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

4

Accordingly, the Court now orders that judgment be issued in Defendant’s

5

favor, with costs and attorney’s fees to be awarded pursuant to a timely filed

6

memorandum of costs and motion for attorney’s fees.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

DATED: December 30, 2014

11
12
HON. ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR.
Judge of the U.S. District Court

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT ON DEFENDANT, LARRY HERRERA’S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT