Eltizam v. City of Las Vegas et al

Filing 39

ORDER. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that 35 plaintiff Nick Eltizam's motion is DENIED. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 8/3/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 *** 4 NICK M. ELTIZAM, 5 6 7 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION v. (ECF No. 35) CITY OF LAS VEGAS and LAS VEGAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants. 9 10 Case No. 2:16-cv-01178-APG-CWH Plaintiff Nick Eltizam alleges that the defendants gave him a ticket for disturbing the 11 peace and he was subsequently put in jail for four months and six days. ECF No. 4 at 4. I 12 previously granted defendant Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s motion for summary 13 judgment based on the rule announced in Heck v. Humphrey, that if a judgment in the plaintiff’s 14 favor “would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence . . . the complaint must 15 be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has already been 16 invalidated.” 512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994). ECF No. 33. 17 Eltizam filed a document that I construe as a motion for reconsideration. ECF No. 35. 18 Eltizam does not provide any basis for concluding that his civil claims against the Las Vegas 19 Metropolitan Police Department are not barred by Heck. I therefore deny the motion. 20 21 22 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff Nick Eltizam’s motion (ECF No. 35) is DENIED. DATED this 2nd day of August, 2017. 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANDREW P. GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?