Houston v. City of Fairfield

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 21, 20242:22-cv-01045California5,760 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DANIELLE N. HOUSTON, No. 2:22-CV-01045-JAM-SCR Plaintiff, v. ORDER RE CROSS-MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

CITY OF FAIRFIELD, a public entity; City of Fairfield Police Officers JOSHUA SMITH (BADGE #1730), BRENDAN BASSI (BADGE #1716), DAVID REEVES (BADGE #927), GAIL HILL (BADGE #1201), individually, jointly and severally; 18 Defendants. 19 INTRODUCTION Before this Court are cross-motions for summary judgment under Rule 56(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The parties filed four briefs in support of and in opposition to the cross motions including Plaintiff Danielle Houston’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for partial summary judgment, Plf.’s Partial Mot. for Summary Judgment, ECF no. 70; Defendants’ City of Fairfield (the “City”), Joshua Smith, David Reeves, Gail Hill, and Brendan Bassi (“Officers,” collectively with the City, “Defendants”) cross-motion for summary judgment, Def.’s Mot. for Summary…

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.