Free Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of California - California

ase 3:07-cv-02558-IVIHP Document 12-5 Filed 10/24/2007 Page 1 of 2 ·
1 1 J. RANDALL ANDRADA (SBN 70000)
' [email protected] · _ ·
2 BRENDAN KENNY (SBN 237969) `
[email protected] . `
3 ANDRADA & ASSOCIATES _
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
4 180 Grand Avenue, Suite 225 _ `
‘ Oakland, California 94612 , _ ·
5 Tel.: (510) 287-4160
Fax: (510) 287-4161 - ·
_ 6 2 ,
Attorneys for Defendants ·
7 SHERIFF GREGORY AHERN and ·
SHERIFF’S TECHNICIAN B. RICHARDSON
8 .
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10 ‘ . - .
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA .
1 1 ·
H E 12 °
5 E HARRISON RINEHART, Case No.:· CV 07-02558 MJJ (PR)
9 2 13 *-· . J
» §§ Plaintiffs, [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
,8 Q 14 DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
ag § v. SUMMARY JUDGMENT
2 Q 15 (FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL
§ _ GREG AHERN- SHERIFF, ET AL. and _ PROCEDURE 56)
ge 16 RICHARDSON — TECHNICIAN, _ _
' No hearing pursuant to 7-30-07 order
1 1 7 Defendants. .
‘ ` ‘Action Filed: May 15, 2007
‘ 1 8 Trial Date: TBD _
19 - _ 0 ` J
, The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants SHERIFF’S TECHNICIAN
RICHARDSON ("Technician Richardson") and SHERIFF GREGORY AHERN (“Sheriff Ahern")
1 21
1 came on regularly for hearing in Courtroom 11 of this Court. Plaintiff appeared in pro per. 1
1 22
1 Defendants appeared by and through their attorney, Brendan Kenny. Having read and considered the
1 23 r .
motion and related papers in this matter, heard argument of counsel, and for good cause showing, the
r - 24
. Court makes the following orders: .
_ (1) With respect to plaintiffs Eighth Amendment claim relating to the February ll, 2007
incident, Plaintiff cannot prove that Technician Richardson was deliberately
27
indifferent before, during, and after the incident; ` _ _
_ 28
l P ‘ 1
{00051920.DOC/}RMS 0666 Rinehart v. Adhem, er al. - C07 2558 MH (PR)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

{ ase 3:07-cv-02558-IVIHP Document 12-5 Filed 10/24/2007 Page 2 of 2
‘ ‘ 1 (2) With respect to plaintiff s Eighth Amendment claim relating to the February 11, 2007 A
2 incident, even if Plaintiff could raise a genuine material fact as to deliberate .
3 indifference, Technician Richardson is entitled to qualified immunity for his conduct
1 4 before, during, and after the February 11, 2007 incident of mutual combat, because he
5 — did not violate a clearly established constitutional right that a reasonable prison
6 official would have been aware of; and
7 i (3) With respect to plaintiff s Eight Amendment claim relating to the February ll, 2007
1 8 incident, Plaintiff cannot recover as to Sheriff Ahem because the only basis for
9 liability is respondeat superior, and this is not a proper basis under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
1() Alternatively, Sheriff Ahern is entitled to qualified immunity.
11 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that said motion for summary judgment is granted. _ A
i E é 12
1 E E I I
I
’ Q E 13 Dated: ,
26 6
i ¤8 z' 14 ~
_ < 5 ‘
E § 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ·
1 § ‘
i 2 °‘ 16 _
( 1 7 . 0 l
1 8
1 9 ~
20 _ I ‘
21
22 '
‘ 23 _
24 A
( 25 l
l 26 .
l 27
28 A
· 2
{00051920.Doc/}RMs 0666 A Rinehart v. Adhem, er al. - C07 2558 MJJ (PR)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION POR SUl\/[MARY JUDGMENT ’

Case 3:07-cv-02558-MHP

Document 12-5

Filed 10/24/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 3:07-cv-02558-MHP

Document 12-5

Filed 10/24/2007

Page 2 of 2