Nia v. Adams

Filing 100

ORDER Denying 99 Motion for Enforcement of Judgment signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 08/09/2011. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 AASIM NIA, CASE NO. 1:08-CV-00520-LJO-DLB PC 10 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT (DOC. 99) 11 v. 12 DERRAL ADAMS, 13 Defendant. 14 / 15 16 Plaintiff Aasim Nia (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department 17 of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Plaintiff was proceeding pro se in a civil rights action 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was proceeding against Defendant Derral Adams for 19 violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. On February 23, 2011, a 20 jury verdict was entered in this action against Defendant Adams. Nominal damages were 21 awarded in the amount of $1.00, and judgment was entered accordingly. Pending before the 22 Court is Plaintiff’s motion, filed June 29, 2011, seeking enforcement of the judgment. 23 Plaintiff contends that he has not received in his prison trust account the $1.00 that was 24 awarded. The Court does not generally issue orders enforcing judgments simply because a 25 verdict has been rendered. Plaintiff is required to use the procedures that are available for 26 enforcement of judgment. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 64 (describing seizure of property for 27 enforcement of judgment, under the law of the state where court is located); Fed. R. Civ. P. 69 28 (describing enforcement of money judgment by writ of execution, in accord with the procedure 1 1 of the state where court is located). 2 Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for 3 enforcement of judgment, filed June 29, 2011, is DENIED. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: b9ed48 August 9, 2011 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?