Sowell et al v. County of Santa Clara

Filing 47

**** PLEASE DISREGARD, UNSIGNED ORDER POSTED IN ERROR, PLEASE SEE DOC. NO. 49 FOR SIGNED ORDER **** ORDER BY JUDGE JEREMY FOGEL DENYING 39 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR HEARING; AND DENYING 41 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT. (jflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/17/2008) Modified on 12/17/2008 (jflc2, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 **E-Filed 12/17/08** IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ARTHUR SOWELL, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, et al. Defendants. Case Number C 07-5394 JF (PVT) ORDER1 DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR HEARING; AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT [Re: docket nos. 39, 41] On December 5, 2008, the Court took Defendants' motion for summary judgment under submission. On December 12, 2008, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend the complaint and a motion to shorten time for hearing. Plaintiff asserts that he erroneously sued the Sheriff of Santa Clara County, believing that the Sheriff operated the jail at which Plaintiff was injured, when in fact the Chief of Correction for Santa Clara County operates the jail. Plaintiff seeks leave to amend his complaint in order to name the Chief of Correction as a defendant. The proposed amendment would be futile. In conjunction with the instant order, the Court has issued an order granting Defendants' motion for summary judgment. As set forth in This disposition is not designated for publication in the official reports. C a se No. C 07-5394 JF (PVT) O R D E R DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR HEARING ETC. ( JF L C 2 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 detail in that order, the only remaining issue in this action is whether the County is liable under the Monell2 doctrine for the alleged constitutional violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. Defendants have established that the County is not liable for reasons that have nothing to do with the fact that Plaintiff failed to name the correct County representative as a defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend is DENIED as futile, and his motion to shorten time is DENIED as moot. DATED: December 17, 2008 JEREMY FOGEL United States District Judge 2 Monell v. Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978). 2 C a se No. C 07-5394 JF (PVT) O R D E R DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR HEARING ETC. ( JF L C 2 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This Order has been served upon the following persons: This Order has been served upon the following persons: Ashwin Virji Ladva aladva@yahoo.com Mark F. Bernal mark.bernal@cco.sccgov.org, cathy.grijalva@cco.sccgov.org Jeffrey Goldfien 10 Knolltop Court Novato, CA 94945-3405 3 C a se No. C 07-5394 JF (PVT) O R D E R DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME FOR HEARING ETC. ( JF L C 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?