Hairston

Hairston v. Salazar

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 18, 20243:22-cv-01800California6,745 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KEVIN TYRONE IZAL HAIRSTON, Case No.: 22cv1800-WQH (KSC)

CDCR #BF-2040,

ORDER:

Plaintiff, 13 v. (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 14 FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, and

J. SALAZAR, N. RODRIGUEZ and

F. AVILES,

(2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ 16 Defendants. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 5.) Plaintiff claims the Defendants, correctional officers Salazar, Rodriguez and Aviles, used excessive force in restraining him after he attacked a correctional officer. (Id. at 4.) Currently pending are cross-motions for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 70, 73.) Plaintiff contends he is entitled to summary judgment because the video footage of the incident supports his allegations that Defendants used excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. at 2-4.) Defendants oppose Plaintiff’s motion, 27 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.