From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ORTH v. BALAAM

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Apr 25, 2011
3:06-cv-00481-LRH-RAM (D. Nev. Apr. 25, 2011)

Summary

dismissing Washoe County Sheriff's Department because "the court cannot allow the case to proceed against a named entity which lacks the capacity to be sued under Nevada law"

Summary of this case from Wampler v. Carson City Sheriff

Opinion

3:06-cv-00481-LRH-RAM.

April 25, 2011


ORDER


Before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert A. McQuaid, Jr. (#190) entered on February 4, 2011, recommending granting the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Harmon, Keller, Lever and Thomas (collectively "Reno Defendants") (#150) filed June 23, 2010, granting the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Washoe County Sheriff's Department, Balaam, Genio and Boxx (collectively "Washoe County Defendants") (#152) filed June 24, 2010, and denying Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (#179) filed October 18, 2010. The Report and Recommendation further recommends that the District Judge enter an order dismissing Plaintiff's remaining state law claims for false arrest (Count 7), malicious prosecution (Count 7) and false imprisonment (Count 8), without prejudice.

Refers to court's docket number.

Plaintiff filed his Objections to Report and Recommendation by U.S. Magistrate McQuaid (#193) on March 21, 2011, Reno Defendants filed their Response to Plaintiff's Objections to Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge (#197) on April 7, 2011, and Washoe County Defendants filed their Response to Plaintiff's Objections to Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge (#195) on April 5, 2011. The action was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 1B 1-4 of the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.

The Court has conducted its de novo review in this case, has fully considered the objections of the Plaintiff, the responses of the Defendants, the pleadings and memoranda of the parties and other relevant matters of record pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule IB 3-2. The Court determines that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (#190) entered on February 4, 2011, should be adopted and accepted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (#190) entered on February 4, 2011, is adopted and accepted, and the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Reno Defendants (#150) is GRANTED, the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Washoe County Defendants (#152) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (#179) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's remaining state law claims for false arrest (Count 7), malicious prosecution (Count 7) and false imprisonment (Count 8), are DISMISSED, without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 22nd day of April, 2011.


Summaries of

ORTH v. BALAAM

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Apr 25, 2011
3:06-cv-00481-LRH-RAM (D. Nev. Apr. 25, 2011)

dismissing Washoe County Sheriff's Department because "the court cannot allow the case to proceed against a named entity which lacks the capacity to be sued under Nevada law"

Summary of this case from Wampler v. Carson City Sheriff
Case details for

ORTH v. BALAAM

Case Details

Full title:SEAN RODNEY ORTH, Plaintiff, v. DENNIS BALAAM, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: Apr 25, 2011

Citations

3:06-cv-00481-LRH-RAM (D. Nev. Apr. 25, 2011)

Citing Cases

Wampler v. Carson City Sheriff

Although NRS § 41.031(2) authorizes suit against "any political subdivision of the State," that authorization…

Dykes v. Naph Care Med. Billing

The Washoe County Sheriff's Office and its medical department may not be sued. See Orth v. Balaam, No.…