Randall v. County of Orange

Full title: JILL RANDALL, an individual, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF ORANGE; MYESHIA…

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Santa Ana

Date published: Feb 18, 2015

SACV11-01740 CJC (MLGx) (C.D. Cal. Feb. 18, 2015)

Opinion

JILL RANDALL, an individual, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF ORANGE; MYESHIA HAMMOND, in her official capacity; JAKE MICHEL, in his official capacity, SUSAN HORN, in her official capacity, IRMA SALAZAR-ALLEN, in her official capacity, MEI PAUW, in his official capacity, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH; STAN WATANABE, in his official capacity, and DOES 1-10 Inclusive, Defendants. No. SACV11-01740 CJC (MLGx) United States District Court, C.D. California, Santa Ana. February 18, 2015

          JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL BY JURY

          CORMAC J. CARNEY, District Judge.

         This action came on for trial on February 10, 2015, in Courtroom 9B of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the Honorable Cormac J. Carney, United States District Judge, presiding.

         Plaintiff Jill Randall was represented by Robert R. Powell and Shawn A. McMillan.

         Defendants, City of Huntington Beach and Stan Watanabe were represented by Sr. Deputy City Attorney Neal Moore of the City of Huntington Beach.

         A jury of eight persons was regularly empanelled and sworn. Witnesses were sworn and testified. After the presentation of the evidence, the instructions of the Court, and the arguments of counsel, the case was submitted to the jury. The jury deliberated and, on February 13, 2015, returned to Court with its verdict as follows:

         We, the jury in the above-captioned matter, answer the questions submitted to us as follows:

         Question 1: Has Ms. Randall proven by a preponderance of the evidence her § 1983 claim that Officer Watanabe violated her Fourteenth Amendment right of familial association?

         If you answered "Yes" to Question No. 1, please answer Question 2. If you answered "No" to Question No. 1, please sign and return this verdict.

         Question 2: Has Ms. Randall proven by a preponderance of the evidence her § 1983 claim against the City of Huntington Beach based on a failure to train Officer Watanabe?

         After answering Question No. 2, please proceed to answer Question No. 3.

         Question 3: What is the total amount of damages Ms. Randall suffered as a result of the conduct of these Defendants?

         After answering Question No. 3, please proceed to answer Question No. 4.

         Question 4: Did Ms. Randall prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Officer Watanabe engaged in the conduct with malice, oppression, or in reckless disregard of Ms. Randall's constitutional rights?

         Please sign and date this form, then return it to the Court.

         Pursuant to the jury's verdict finding in favor of Defendants City of Huntington Beach and Stan Watanabe,

         NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that final judgment in this action be entered as follows:

         Defendants City of Huntington Beach and Stan Watanabe shall have judgment entered in their favor on Plaintiff's claims for violations of Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and Plaintiff shall take nothing; and,

         Defendants City of Huntington Beach and Stan Watanabe shall recover costs of suit as provided by law.