Bode

Bode v. City of Fullerton

Good Law
815 F. Supp. 2d 1117·2011 WL 4542722·2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115864
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 26, 2011Case SACV 10-835 AG(MLGx)California2,536 words

Opinion

Opinion

Guilford, J.

ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT CITY OF FULLERTON’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

This case raises disturbing allegations of police misconduct. Plaintiffs Kari Bode (“Bode”) and Gina Nastasi (“Nastasi”) (collectively, the “Plaintifs”) filed a Complaint (“Complaint”) against the City of Fullerton (“City” or “Defendant”), Albert Rincon (“Rincon”), and Christopher Wren, alleging that Officer Rincon sexually harassed them during their arrest. The parties stipulated to the dismissal of Christopher Wren. Now Defendant City of Fullerton seeks summary judgment on all eight claims against it and on the issue of punitive damages. The Court DENIES Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”) as to Claims One through Eight. The Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion as to the issue of punitive damages.

BACKGROUND

The following facts are based on admissible evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.

The City hired Officer Rincon in 2006. (Rincon Depo. 30:1-8.) The City has a mandatory policy requiring all police officers to wear a Digital Audio Record (“DAR”) at all times and turn them on when they are in contact with a suspect. (Id. at…

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.