Opinion
CV18-08740 CJC (ASx) CV18-09936 CJC (ASx)
06-08-2022
CLARA L. BARILLAS, JUAN J. BARILLAS and RUBY E. BARILLAS, both Individually and as Successors in Interest to JUAN A. BARILLAS Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES; LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT; DETECTIVE MICHAEL MONTOYA, an individual, DETECTIVE CORBIN RHEAULT, an individual, and DOES 1-50, Defendants.
JUDGMENT
HONORABLE CORMAC J. CARNEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
This action came on regularly for trial on May 24, 2022, in Courtroom “9B” of the United States District Court, Central District of California, Central Division, the Honorable Cormac J. Carney, Judge Presiding. The Plaintiffs CLARA L. BARILLAS, JUAN J. BARILLAS, both Individually and as Successors-in-Interest to Juan A. Barillas, were present and were represented by attorney David Gharakanian, Jr. The Plaintiff ARACELI FLORES, both Individually and as Successor-in-Interest to Juan A. Barillas, was present and was represented by attorneys Dale K. Galipo, Eric Valenzuela and David Torres-Siegrist. The Defendants, CITY OF LOS ANGELES, DETECTIVE MICHAEL MONTOYA and DETECTIVE CORBIN RHEAULT were present and represented by attorneys Colleen R. Smith and Cory M. Brente.
A jury of eight (8) persons was regularly impaneled and sworn on May 24, 2022. Witnesses were sworn and testified. On May 27, 2022, following the presentation of evidence and argument during a jury trial, the jury, in the above-entitled action, UNANIMOUSLY found as follows:
JUDGMENT ON SPECIAL VERDICT
WE, THE JURY in the above-entitled case, find the following verdict on the questions submitted to us:
QUESTION 1 : Did Detective Michael Montoya or Detective Corbin Rheault use excessive or unreasonable force against Juan A. Barillas in violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment?
YES NO
Detective Michael Montoya ___ X
Detective Corbin Rheault ___ X
If you answered “YES” for either Officer, proceed to Question 2.
If you answered “NO” to both Officers, answer no further questions, proceed to the end, and sign and date the verdict.
QUESTION 2 : Did either of the defendant police officers act with a purpose to harm unrelated to legitimate law enforcement objectives in violation of Plaintiffs' substantive due process rights to familial relations under the Fourteenth Amendment?
YES NO
Detective Michael Montoya ___ ___
Detective Corbin Rheault ___ ___
Proceed to Question 3.
QUESTION 3 : Did either officer use unreasonable force and commit battery under state law?
YES NO
Detective Michael Montoya ___ ___
Detective Corbin Rheault ___ ___
If you answered “YES” for either of the officers, answer Question 4.
If you answered “NO” to both of the Officers, proceed to Question 5.
QUESTION 4 : Was the officer's unreasonable force and battery a substantial factor in causing Juan A. Barillas' death?
YES NO
Detective Michael Montoya
Detective Corbin Rheault
Proceed to Question 5.
QUESTION 5 : Was either officer negligent under state law?
YES NO
Detective Michael Montoya ___
Detective Corbin Rheault ___
If you answered “YES” for either of the officers, answer Question 6. If you answered “NO” to both of the Officers, proceed to Question 10.
QUESTION 6 : Was the officer's negligence a substantial factor in causing Juan A. Barillas' death?
YES NO
Detective Michael Montoya ___
Detective Corbin Rheault ___
Proceed to Question 7.
QUESTION 7: Was Juan A. Barillas also negligent during the incident in question?
___ YES ___ NO
If you answered “YES”, answer Question 8.
If you answered “NO”, proceed to Question 10.
QUESTION 8 : Was Juan A. Barillas' negligence a substantial factor in causing his death?
___ YES ___ NO
If you answered “YES”, answer Question 9.
If you answered “NO”, proceed to Question 10.
QUESTION 9 : What percentage of fault do you assign for negligence?
Detective Michael Montoya ___%
Detective Corbin Rheault ___%
Juan A. Barillas ___%
Your total must equal 100%
Proceed to Question 10.
QUESTION 10 : Did either of the defendant police officers violate Juan A. Barillas' rights under California Civil Code § 52.1?
YES NO
Detective Michael Montoya ___
Detective Corbin Rheault ___
Please sign and date this form, and then return it to the Court.
By reason of Plaintiffs' voluntary dismissals, the rulings of the Court, and the special verdict, Defendants CITY OF LOS ANGELES, DETECTIVE MICHAEL MONTOYA and DETECTIVE CORBIN RHEAULT are entitled to judgment against Plaintiffs CLARA BARILLAS, JUAN J. BARILLAS and ARACELI FLORES.
Now, therefore, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiffs CLARA BARILLAS, JUAN J. BARILLAS and ARACELI FLORES, have and recover nothing by reason of each and all their claims as set forth in the Complaint against Defendants CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al. and that the Defendants shall recover their costs in accordance with Local Rule 54.
JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS ON ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THEM.
IT IS SO ORDERED.