Arden v. Kastell et al

Filing 165

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION AS A MATTER OF LAW. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 10/31/2014. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

12

Case No. 10-cv-00436 NC

GARY ARDEN,

13

Plaintiff,

14

v.

15

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A
MATTER OF LAW

FRANK KASTELL,

16

Defendant.

17
18
19

This order memorializes the Court’s ruling on a motion made by Kastell during the

20

jury trial held in this case. On October 17, 2014, at the close of Arden’s case, Kastell

21

moved for a judgment as a matter of law on Arden’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. Kastell

22

argued that Arden failed to present any facts supporting the claim that Kastell deliberately

23

fabricated evidence against Arden or that any such fabricated evidence caused the

24

prosecution of Arden. The motion is DENIED on the ground that Arden presented a

25

legally sufficient evidentiary basis to allow a reasonable jury to find for him on these

26

issues. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a).

27

Additionally, Kastell indicated that he intended to move for a judgment as a matter

28

of law on Arden’s claim for punitive damages. In response, Arden agreed that he will not
Case No. 10-cv-00436 NC
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR JMOL

1

pr
roceed with that claim, rendering moot Kaste
h
,
ell’s motion as to that i
n
issue.

2

IT IS SO ORDER
RED.

3

Date: October 31, 2014

4

____
__________
_________
_
Nath
hanael M. C
Cousins
Unit States M
ted
Magistrate J
Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ca No. 10-c
ase
cv-00436 NC
C
OR
RDER DEN
NYING DEFE
ENDANT’S
S
MOTION FOR JMOL
M
R

2