Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles
District Court, C.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS (1) FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW; (2) MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT AS TO MOVING DEFENDANTS AND FOR A NEW TRIAL FOR THESE DEFENDANTS AFTER RESOLUTION OF INTERLOCUTORY QUALIFIED IMMUNITY APPEALS; (3) TO VACATE PUNITIVE DAMAGES; and (4) FOR A NEW TRIAL PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 59(A).
CONSUELO B. MARSHALL, District Judge.
Before the Court are four post-trial motions filed by Defendants:
1. Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b) (“JMOL”). (Docket No. 637.)
2. Motion to Vacate Judgment and for New Trial (“Motion to Vacate”). (Docket No. 638.)
2Cases cited59 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Hudson v. McMillianSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Robert Reese, Jr. v. County of SacramentoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- (PC) Phelps v. PerezDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- Atherley v. KernanDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021
- Estate of Joel Reyes Munoz by its successor in interest Leticia Duran Martinez v. The United States of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2024
- Estate of Xander Mann v. County of StanislausDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.