Opinion
Case No. CV 06-2409 GAF (VBKx)
12-06-2011
RICHARD ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, etc., et al., Defendants.
BALLARD ROSENBERG GOLPER & SAVITT LLP JOHN J. MANIER Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, MARGARET YORK, WILLIAM NASH and VICTOR TURNER
LINDA MILLER S AVITT, SBN 94164
JOHN J. MANIER, SBN 145701
BALLARD ROSENBERG GOLPER & SAVITT LLP
Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES, MARGARET YORK,
WILLIAM NASH and VICTOR TURNER
[Hon. Gary Allen Feess]
PROPSOED JUDGEMENT ON
SPECIAL VERDICT
Trial Date: November29, 2011
Verdict Date: December 6, 2011
Defendants County of Los Angeles, Margaret York, William Nash and Victor Turner hereby present their Proposed Judgment on the Special Verdict returned by Dated: December 6, 2011.
BALLARD ROSENBERG
GOLPER & SAVITT LLP
JOHN J. MANIER
Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES, MARGARET YORK, WILLIAM
NASH and VICTOR TURNER
RICHARD ROBINSON, Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, etc., et al., Defendants.
Case No. CV 06-2409 GAF (VBKx)
[Hon. Gary Allen Feess]
JUDGMENT ON SPECIAL
VERDICT
The above-titled action came on regularly for trial on November 29, 2011, before the Honorable Gary Allen Feess, United States District Judge. A jury of eight persons was regularly impaneled and sworn. Witnesses were sworn and testified. After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, the jury was duly instructed by the Court and the cause was submitted to the jury with directions to return a Special Verdict. The jury deliberated and thereafter returned into the court with the following Special Verdict:
We, the jury, being first empaneled and sworn, do find our verdict as follows: QUESTION NO. 1;
In connection with the following subjects, did Plaintiff Richard Robinson prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was speaking as a private citizen?
1.1 Reporting suspected time card fraud by OPS Officer Mitch Grace:
Yes ___ No X
1.2 Reporting events regarding his observation of police vehicles at the American Legion Hall:
Yes ___ No X
1.3 Follow up communications with higher ranking OPS officers as to whether action had been taken regarding his reports concerning items 1.1 and 1.2:
Yes____ No X
1.4 Reporting the display of distinctive tattoos by members of the OPS training unit:
Yes ___ No X
1.5 Reporting a possible battery on a police Explorer Scout:
Yes ___ No X
1.6 Reporting a possible unreported use of force by a police officer on a juvenile suspect:
Yes ___ No X
1.7 Filing a complaint regarding the display of a "Parking for Irish Only" sign behind the Sergeant's desk:
Yes ___ No X IF YOU ANSWERED "YES" TO ANY OF THE PRIOR QUESTIONS, ANSWER QUESTION NO. 2. IF YOU ANSWERED "NO" TO ALL OF THEM, PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN THE VERDICT FORM.
FOREPERSON
It appearing by reason of said verdict that Defendants County of Los Angeles, Margaret York, William Nash and Victor Turner ("Defendants"), and each of them, are entitled to judgment against Plaintiff Richard Robinson ("Plaintiff),
IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:
1. Plaintiff shall take nothing on his Complaint against Defendants County of Los Angeles, Margaret York, William Nash and Victor Turner.
2. Defendants shall recover their costs from Plaintiff in the aggregate amount of $ ___
4. There being no just cause for delay, the Clerk is ordered to enter this judgment forthwith.
The Honorable Gary Allen Feess
United States District Judge