Michael Easley et al v. City of Riverside et al
Michael Easley and Stephania Session |
City of Riverside, Sergio Diaz, Does and Silvio Macias |
5:2014cv00117 |
January 17, 2014 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Sheri Pym |
Terry J. Hatter |
Civil Rights: Other |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 130 ORDER by Judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr remanding case to Riverside County Superior Court, Case number RIC 131408. Plaintiff maintains the right to seek statutory attorney fees for all work done in connection with the case (in federal and state court) if he prevails on his Fourth Amendment claim at trial; and Defendants agree not to ask the state court to move the trial date on the grounds that the case has been remanded. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (shb) |
Filing 100 ORDER AND JUDGMENT by Judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr: It is Ordered, sua sponte, that summary judgment on Easley's claim for violation of 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 be, and hereby is, Granted in favor of Officer Macias. It is further Ordered, Adjudged, a nd Decreed that Judgment be, and hereby is, Entered in favor of Defendant Silvio Macias and against Plaintiff Michael Easley on Easley's claim for violation of 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. It is further Ordered that the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims. It is further Ordered that the remainder of this action be, and hereby is, Dismissed without prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (gk) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.