Arnold v. County of El Dorado
Filing
15
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/12/11 ORDERING that the Findings and Recommendations filed March 15, 2011, are ADOPTED and: 1) Defendants' motion to dismiss, filed on January 28, 2011 8 , is denied in all respects except as set f orth in (2), (3) and (4) below; 2. All claims with respect to unlawful arrest are dismissed with prejudice; 3. The first cause of action (Monell) is dismissed as to defendant County of El Dorado with leave to amend; 4. To the extent that the third cause of action is any different from the first, and plaintiff is attempting to allege a Monell claim, it too is dismissed with leave to amend; and 5. If plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, she shall do so within fourteen (14) days of this order; if no amended complaint is filed within that time period, defendants shall file and serve an answer to the remaining claims within fourteen (14) days thereafter.(Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
PENNY ARNOLD,
Plaintiff,
11
vs.
12
13
CIV-S-10-3119 KJM GGH PS
COUNTY OF EL DORADO, et al.,
14
Defendants.
15
__________________________________/
In this case, plaintiff is proceeding pro se on civil rights and related claims against
16
17
ORDER
El Dorado County and two deputy sheriffs.
18
On March 15, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations,
19
which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings
20
and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections have been filed.1
Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v.
21
22
United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are
23
reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.
24
1983).
25
1
26
On May 16, 2011, plaintiff did file a proposed order adopting the findings and
recommendations, which the court has reviewed.
1
1
2
The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing,
concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Findings and Recommendations in full.
3
4
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendations filed
March 15, 2011, are ADOPTED and
5
6
1. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, filed on January 28, 2011 (ECF 8), is denied in
all respects except as set forth in (2), (3) and (4) below;
7
2. All claims with respect to unlawful arrest are dismissed with prejudice;
8
3. The first cause of action (Monell) is dismissed as to defendant County of El
9
Dorado with leave to amend;
10
11
4. To the extent that the third cause of action is any different from the first, and
plaintiff is attempting to allege a Monell claim, it too is dismissed with leave to amend; and
12
5. If plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, she shall do so within
13
fourteen (14) days of this order; if no amended complaint is filed within that time period,
14
defendants shall file and serve an answer to the remaining claims within fourteen (14) days
15
thereafter.
16
DATED: September 12, 2011.
17
18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
arnold3119.jo
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?