Latrivia E. Harris v. Sacramento Police Department

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 20252:25-cv-01398California366 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LATRIVIA E. HARRIS, Case No. 2:25-cv-01398-TLN-JDP Plaintiff, v. ORDER SACRAMENTO POLICE

DEPARTMENT,

15 Defendant.

17 This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 18 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On August 22, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and 19 recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any 20 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No 21 objections were filed.1 22 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 23 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 24 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 25 26 1 Although it appears from the file that Plaintiff Latrivia E. Harris’s (“Plaintiff”) copy of the findings and recommendations was returned, Plaintiff was properly served. It is the…

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.