Quinn v. Fresno County Sheriff et al

Filing 198

JUDGMENT on the Special Verdict, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/11/13. CASE CLOSED. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JAMES LORAN QUINN,

11
12
13

Case No. 1:10-cv-01617 LJO BAM

Plaintiff,

JUDGMENT ON THE SPECIAL VERDICT

vs.
FRESNO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15

/

16

This case came on for trial on August 7, 2012 in Courtroom 4 of the United States District Court,

17

Eastern District of California, Fresno Division. The Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill presided. David

18

M. Hollingsworth appeared on behalf of Plaintiff James L. Quinn, and James J. Arendt and Roy Santos

19

appeared on behalf of Defendants David Alanis and the County of Fresno.

20

A jury of eight (8) persons was regularly impaneled and sworn. The parties then made opening

21

statements, witnesses were sworn and testified, and exhibits were admitted into evidence. On August

22

9, 2012, the Court instructed the jury, the parties presented closing arguments, and the jury retired to

23

deliberate. On August 10, 2012, the jury unanimously returned a Special Verdict in favor of Plaintiff

24

James L. Quinn and against Defendants David Alanis and the County of Fresno for violations of 42

25

U.S.C. § 1983, false imprisonment, violations of California Civil Code section 52.1, and negligence.

26

Pursuant to the Special Verdict, Plaintiff was awarded the following damages:

27

1.

Violation of § 1983: $21,000 in economic damages

28

2.

False Imprisonment: $4,000 in non-economic damages
1

1

3.

Violation of Section 52.1: $400,000 in non-economic damages

2

4.

Negligence: $0

3

(Doc. 167.)

4

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiff James L.

5

Quinn shall recover and have judgment against David Alanis in the amount of four hundred and twenty-

6

five thousand dollars ($425,000.00) with interest thereon to accrue at the legal rate from the date of

7

judgment is final until the date of satisfaction of the judgment. Plaintiff’s counsel may also file a motion

8

with this Court seeking reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred as a result of the litigation.

9

NOTE: The judgment has been changed in effect by a post trial motion and ruling.

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11

Dated:

March 11, 2013

/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill
B9ed48
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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