Edward Rezek v. City of Tustin et al

Filing 224

JUDGMENT by Judge David O. Carter, in favor of City of Tustin, IPC International Corporation, Vestar Property Management Company, Brian Chupp No 1069, Jose Reyes, Mark Turner No 1002, Scott Jordan against Plaintiff Edward Rezek. Related to: Notice of Lodging 223 . (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (twdb)

NOTE: CHANGES HAVE BEEN
MADE TO THIS DOCUMENT
1

JS-6

2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7

EDWARD REZEK,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10
11
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
COSTA MESA

WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN
& SMART

12
13

v.
CITY OF TUSTIN, BRIAN CHUPP
#1069, MARK TURNER #1002,
individually and as peace officers,
SCOTT JORDAN, Chief of Police, IPC
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,
VESTAR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
COMPANY, JOSE REYES, DOES 1-10,
inclusive,

14

CASE NO: SACV11-01601 DOC (RNBx)
BEFORE THE HONORABLE
DAVID O. CARTER
JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF
DEFENDANTS AND AGAINST
EDWARD REZEK [216]
TYPE:
Trial
DATE:
January 5, 2015
TIME:
12:00 p.m.
COURTROOM:
9D

Defendants.

15
16
17

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

18

This matter came on regularly for trial on January 5, 2015, in Courtroom 9D of

19

the above-titled court, the Hon. David O. Carter, judge, presiding. Plaintiff Edward

20

Rezek (hereinafter "Plaintiff") was represented by Thomas Beck of The Law Offices

21

of Thomas Beck. Defendants City of Tustin, a public entity, Brian Chupp and Mark

22

Turner, individually and as peace officers with the City of Tustin, a public entity

23

(hereinafter referred to collectively as "Defendants") were represented by Robert L.

24

Kaufman of Woodruff, Spradlin & Smart. All other parties to this action had been

25

dismissed prior to trial.

26

A jury was empanelled, and trial began, on January 5, 2015. A unanimous

27

verdict in Defendants’ favor was arrived at and entered on January 13, 2015. A true

28

and correct copy of the verdict is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." As a result of that
1
1059051.1

1

trial and verdict, this Court orders as follows:

2

1.

Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff;

3

2.

All other claims were either dismissed or adjudicated against Plaintiff as

4

reflected in the Court's previous orders;

5

3.

6

Defendants may seek costs as the prevailing party consistent with Federal
Rule 54 and Local Rule 54-2 and 54-3; and

7

4.

Defendants are to give notice of this judgment;

8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10
11

DATED: January 29, 2015

By: ___________________________
THE HON. DAVID O. CARTER
United States District Judge

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
COSTA MESA

WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN
& SMART

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1059051.1