From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnsdale v. Sacramento County Sheriffs' Association

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 15, 2008
NO. CIV. S-07-1636 LKK/KJM (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2008)

Opinion

NO. CIV. S-07-1636 LKK/KJM.

February 15, 2008


ORDER


On January 28, 2008, the court adopted the Special Master's findings and instructed, in an abundance of caution, that "the parties inform the court by [Friday,] February 8, 2008 of any outstanding issues; otherwise, the court will enter judgment and close the case." Neither party filed anything with the court. That following Monday, on February 11, 2008, defendants took the courtesy of providing the court with a proposed order. The order, which the court approved on February 12, 2008, provided that "[j]udgment . . . is entered in favor of Defendants . . . on the Complaint" and "in favor of Cross-Defendants . . . on the Cross-Complaint."

Mr. Gorski now has filed a motion for reconsideration of that order, protesting that: "Certification of the election has nothing to do with Judgment on the merits of the case, which is what the proposed order represents. For instance, the Second Cause of Action, 42 U.S.C. SECTION 1983, represents an action for threat of force under color of authority to obtain property from a person (i.e. Cody Blevins) who was not an employee of the Sheriff's Department or a member of the SCDSA."

As an initial matter, if Mr. Gorski wanted to make it explicit that a certain claim was dismissed without prejudice, it is baffling why he did not, as the court ordered, "inform the court . . . of any outstanding issues [that would prevent] enter[ing] judgment and clos[ing] the case." Mr. Gorski made the choice not to heed the court's instruction.

Furthermore, the February 12, 2008 order states that the court has adopted the findings and recommendations of Special Master Eugene Lynch and accordingly enters judgment in favor of the defendants on the complaint and in favor of the cross-defendants on the cross-complaint. Presumably, any issue that the special master did not reach was similarly not part of this court's judgment, given that the court expressly relied upon his findings and recommendations.

If the parties disagree with this tentative ruling, they shall submit further briefing by February 19, 2008.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Barnsdale v. Sacramento County Sheriffs' Association

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 15, 2008
NO. CIV. S-07-1636 LKK/KJM (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2008)
Case details for

Barnsdale v. Sacramento County Sheriffs' Association

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM BARNSDALE, acting president, Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 15, 2008

Citations

NO. CIV. S-07-1636 LKK/KJM (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2008)