Jesus Escochea v. The County of Los Angeles et al

Filing 220

JUDGMENT by Judge John F. Walter. IT IS NOW, THEREFORE, HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that judgment is entered in this action as follows: Plaintiff Jesus Escochea shall have judgment in his favor and against Defendant Ronald Valdivia on his Fourth Amendment claim. Plaintiff Jesus Escochea shall recover 12,500.00, plus attorneys' fees in the amount of $______ and costs in the amount of $______. Defendant the County of Los Angeles shall have judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff Jesus Escochea on his Monell claim. Defendant County of Los Angeles shall recover attorneys fees in the amount of $______ and costs in the amount of $_______ (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (jp) Modified on 8/18/2017 (sr).

Download PDF
1 2 3 JS-6 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) The County of Los Angeles, ) ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ___________________________ Jesus Escochea, Case No. CV 16-271-JFW (JEMx) JUDGMENT WHEREAS, on January 19, 2017, Plaintiff Jesus Escochea 18 dismissed his claims alleged in the third, fourth, and fifth 19 causes of action of the First Amended Complaint for tort in 20 se and negligence against Defendants Ronald Valdivia and the 21 County of Los Angeles, and the Court bifurcated the Monell 22 claim alleged against Defendant the County of Los Angeles in 23 the second cause of action of the First Amended Complaint; 24 WHEREAS, on February 8, 2017, pursuant to a Stipulation 25 for Dismissal with Prejudice between Plaintiff Jesus Escochea 26 and Defendants the City of Hawthorne and Keith Kauffman, the 27 Court entered an Order dismissing Plaintiff Jesus Escochea’s 28 entire action against Defendants the City of Hawthorne and Keith Kauffman; 1 WHEREAS, on March 3, 2017, pursuant to a Stipulation Re 2 Plaintiff’s Claim Based Upon a Violation of the First 3 Amendment, the Court entered an Order dismissing Plaintiff 4 Jesus Escochea’s claim for violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 5 based upon an alleged violation of the First Amendment 6 alleged in the first cause of action of the First Amended 7 Complaint against Defendant Ronald Valdivia; 8 WHEREAS, the sole remaining claim against Defendant 9 Ronald Valdivia for violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based upon 10 an alleged violation of the Fourth Amendment alleged in the 11 first cause of action of the First Amended Complaint came on 12 for a jury trial on April 4, 2017; 13 WHEREAS, on April 5, 2017, the jury returned a verdict in 14 favor of Plaintiff Jesus Escochea on his claim for violation 15 of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based upon an alleged violation of the 16 Fourth Amendment and against Defendant Ronald Valdivia; and 17 WHEREAS, on May 18, 2017, the Court granted summary 18 judgment in favor of Defendant the County of Los Angeles on 19 Plaintiff Jesus Escochea's claim for Monell liability under 20 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleged in the second cause of action of the 21 First Amended Complaint; 22 IT IS NOW, THEREFORE, HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND 23 DECREED that judgment is entered in this action as follows: 24 1. Plaintiff Jesus Escochea shall have judgment in his 25 favor and against Defendant Ronald Valdivia on his Fourth 26 Amendment claim. 27 28 2 1 2. Plaintiff Jesus Escochea shall recover $12,500.00, 2 plus attorneys’ fees in the amount of $__________ and costs 3 in the amount of $_______________. 4 3. Defendant the County of Los Angeles shall have 5 judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff Jesus Escochea on 6 his Monell claim. 7 4. Defendant County of Los Angeles shall recover 8 attorneys’ fees in the amount of $__________ and costs in the 9 amount of $______________. 10 11 The Clerk is ordered to enter this Judgment. 12 13 14 Dated: June 6, 2017 JOHN F. WALTER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?