Jackson v. Coates et al

Filing 57

ORDER that Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment 40 is DENIED. The parties shall file a Joint Pretrial Order by 10/8/10. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 9/7/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA -oOoPATRICIA JACKSON, individually and ) as Special Administrator of the Estate ) of David C Collopy, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) UNITED STATES, et al, ) ) ) Defendants. ) )

2 :09-CV-00223-PMP-GWF ORDER

Before the Court for consideration is Defendants' fully briefed Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #40), filed on May 5, 2010. On September 1, 2010, the Court conducted a hearing regarding Defendants' motion. In this action, Plaintiff Patricia Jackson, individually and as Special Administrator of the Estate of David C. Collopy, seeks to hold Defendants, the United States and Officer James Coates, liable for the shooting death of David Collopy on February 9, 2007 within the Desert National Wildlife Refuge. The only surviving witness to the events leading to the shooting death of Collopy is Defendant Coates. As forcefully argued in Defendants' motion for summary judgment, most of the circumstantial evidence in this case is consistent with Defendant Coates verison of what occurred. Moreover, Defendant's cite to the opinion of Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Homicide Detective Jason

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

McCarthy that everything at the scene of the shooting coincided with Coates' verison of events. Plaintiff has, however, offered the testimony of Police Practices Expert D.P. Van Blaricom who opines that physical evidence at the scene of the shooting, including the location of shell casings, and the inability of Coates to recall certain aspects of the incident are not consistent with Coates verison of the events. This Court cannot on summary judgment evaluate the credibility of witnesses such as Defendant Coates. Although the Court finds Defendants' proffered verison of the events of February 7, 2007 to be more plausible then that posited by Plaintiff, the Court finds that genuine issues of material fact exists which can only be resolved by the trial jury assessing the credibility of Defendant Coates and other witnesses that testify at trial. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #40) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a Joint Pretrial Order on or before October 8, 2010. DATED: September 7, 2010.

PHILIP M. PRO United States District Judge

2