Jackson et al v. City Of Pittsburg et al

Filing 220

AMENDED JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Alsup on August 9, 2010. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/10/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 10 FREDERICK JACKSON, ASHLEY NICOLE JACKSON, and BRIANA FREDRANIQUE ANNETTE JACKSON, Plaintiffs, v. G. LOMBARDI, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 275), C. SMITH, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 285), P. DUMPA, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 291), WILLIAM BLAKE HATCHER, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 274), Defendants. / Based on the jury verdict in this case, judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff Frederick Jackson and jointly and severally in the amount of $250,000.00 against Officer Cory Lee Smith, Officer Sankara Reddy Dumpa, and Officer Gerald Vincent Lombardi. Additionally, further judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff Frederick Jackson and without joint and several liability against Officer Cory Lee Smith in the amount of $6,500.00, Officer Sankara Reddy Dumpa in the No. C 09-01016 WHA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AMENDED JUDGMENT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 amount of $2,500.00, and Officer Gerald Vincent Lombardi in the amount of $7,500.00. Judgment is otherwise entered in favor of defendants and against plaintiffs. This amended judgment does not change the deadline of August 20, 2010, for the parties' post-trial motions. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 9, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 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?