Reyes et al v. Osborne et al

Filing 49

ORDER granting 27 Motion for Summary Judgment signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/22/16. (Kaminski, H)

5

BRUCE A. KILDAY, ESQ., SB No. 066415
Email: [e-mail]
AMIE McTAVISH, ESQ., SB No. 242372
Email: [e-mail]
ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF, LLP
Attorneys at Law
601 University Avenue, Suite 150
Sacramento, CA 95825

6

Telephone: [phone]

1
2
3
4

Telecopier: [phone]

7
Attorneys for Defendant LAWRENCE WIGHT
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RAMIRO REYES and STELLA REYES

12

Plaintiffs,

13
vs.

14
15

JOSEPH OSBORNE, et al.,

16

Defendants.

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:15-cv-00932-JAM-CKD
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT
LAWRENCE WIGHT’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
DATE:
TIME:
DEPT:

December 13, 2016
1:30 p.m.
6

Judge John A. Mendez

19
20

Defendant LAWRENCE WIGHT’S Motion for Summary Judgment can on regularly for

21

hearing on December 13, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. in the above-entitled court, the Honorable John A.

22

Mendez presiding.

23
24
25
26
27
28

Amie McTavish of Angelo, Kilday & Kilduff LLP appeared on behalf of Defendant
LAWRENCE WIGHT and moving party.
Frear Stephen Schmid appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs’ RAMIRO REYES and STELLA
REYES.
Joseph A. Salazar, Jr. of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP appeared on behalf of
Defendant THERESA WENTLAND.
-1ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT LAWRENCE WIGHT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

1

The matter was fully brief and argued, whereupon the Court made the following order,

2

which incorporates by reference the Court’s ruling and comments during the Motion for

3

Summary Judgment hearing:

4

Based upon the Court’s review of the materials and argument at the hearing, the Court

5

finds there is a triable issue as to whether Defendant LAWRENCE WIGHT’s actions amounted

6

to a state action for purposes of 42 USC §1983. However, the Court determines Defendant

7

LAWRENCE WIGHT is entitled to qualified immunity and grants summary judgment in favor

8

of Defendant LAWRENCE WIGHT on each of Plaintiffs’ claims for denial of property under the

9

14th Amendment, and unreasonable seizure under the 4th Amendment. As to Plaintiffs’ state

10

law claims, the Court grants summary judgment in favor of Defendant LAWRENCE WIGHT as

11

to: Plaintiffs’ assault and/or battery claim; on Plaintiffs’ claim for a violation of the Bane Act,

12

finding no of threats or coercion by Defendant LAWRENCE WIGHT; and finds Defendant

13

LAWRENCE WIGHT has immunity under Gov. Code section 821.6 for the wrongful eviction

14

and trespass claims.

15

Judgment is to be entered in favor of Defendant, LAWRENCE WIGHT, accordingly.

16
17
18

Dated: December 22, 2016

19
20

/s/ JOHN A. MENDEZ
JOHN A. MENDEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Approved as to form.

21
22
23
24

/s/ Frear Stephen Schmid
(as authorized on 12.20.16)
____________________________
Attorney for Plaintiffs

25
26
27
28
-2ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT LAWRENCE WIGHT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT