Parsons

Parsons v. United States

Good Law
360 F. Supp. 2d 1083·2004 WL 3185311·95 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 525·2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23113
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 20, 2004CIV-F-5215OWWCalifornia6,139 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wanger, J.

ORDER RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs claim unconstitutional execution of a search warrant and excessive force in holding an occupant in the course of executing the warrant. Defendants move for summary judgment. Doc. 85, Defendants’ Memo. Plaintiffs oppose the motion. Doc. 90, Plaintiffs’ Opposition.

I. Background

The Plaintiffs in this case are Norman Parsons and Mary Vincent. Mr. Parsons is the manager of Global Business Services. Ms. Vincent is the manager of two companies: Vincent & Associates and Ash-er Personnel. The Plaintiffs maintain the action individually and on behalf of the companies they manage. Both Mr. Parsons and Ms. Vincent maintained offices at 333 W. Shaw Ave (Suites 18 and 15 respectively). Both had business dealings with Anderson Ark and Associates, an organization under investigation for criminal activity. The Defendants in this case are the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and the IRS agents (“IRS Agents”) who searched Plaintiffs’ offices pursuant to a search warrant. The IRS Agents are sued in their individual and official capacities. The IRS is a valid defendant (sovereign immunity waived) as Plaintiffs have filed an administrative tort…

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.