Winder v. McMahon
District Court, C.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
GAIL J. STANDISH, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The three remaining defendants in this case, the County of San Bernardino and *1198Deputies Bustamante and Ortiz, move for summary judgment as to all of plaintiff Richard Winder's claims. (Motion for Summary Judgment ("Mtn.") [Dkt. 32].) Defendants move for summary judgment on the basis, inter alia , that Winder's claims against them are barred by the rule set forth by the Supreme Court in Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), and the County moves for summary judgment on the additional basis that Winder has not…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- (PC) Correa v. BravdrickDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2022
- (PC) King v. VillegasDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
- (PC) Warden v. CowanDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
- Arellano v. HaskinsDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- Chavez v. City of California CityDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.