Gonzalez v. Cooke et al
Filing
94
COURTROOM MINUTES for Motion Hearing held before Judge Richard P. Matsch on 2/12/2015. Taking under advisement 92 Defendants' Amended Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. FTR: K. Terasaki. (ebuch)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch
Date:
Courtroom Deputy:
FTR Technician:
February 12, 2015
Emily Buchanan
Kathy Terasaki
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00366-RPM
Counsel:
MICHAEL GONZALES,
David Lane
Plaintiff,
v.
SHERIFF JOHN COOKE, in his official and
individual capacities,
COMMANDER GREG BROSWELL, in his
individual capacity,
COMMANDER KENNETH LEACH, in his
individual capacity,
COMMANDER PAUL GLANZ, in his
individual capacity,
COMMANDER SALLY GOMEZ, in her
individual capacity, and
COMMANDER JERAMY HETTINGER, in
his individual capacity,
Mark Ratner
Defendants.
COURTROOM MINUTES
MOTION HEARING
10:28 a.m.
Court in session.
Before the Court today is Defendants’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.
Statements by the Court regarding the documents submitted by counsel, its impressions of the
case, the problem of qualified immunity, and plaintiff’s thoughts about pursuing each individual
defendant.
10:32 a.m.
Mr. Lane answers questions of the Court regarding the safety concern with two
hit men in the unit, the individuals in charge at the jail, keeping Mr. Gonzales safe
at the jail, and a policy issue.
10:45 a.m.
Mr. Ratner answers questions of the Court regarding an anonymous tip regarding
the hit, the transfer of Mr. Williams, identifying the Sureños gang members, the
fullness of the jail, and the lack of an adequate policy.
10:57 a.m.
Response by Mr. Lane.
ORDERED: Defendants’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.
56 (Doc. No. 92) is TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT.
11:01 a.m.
Court in recess.
Hearing concluded. Total time:
33 min.
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?