Herrera

(PC) Ransom v. Herrera

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 23, 20191:11-cv-01709California4,555 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

10 This case is set for trial September 24, 2019, on Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (ECF

11 No. 72), against defendants Brannum and Herrera. Remaining to be tried are claims brought under

12 U.S.C. § 1983 based upon: Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process, Fourteenth Amendment

13 substantive due process under Devereaux v. Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2001), retaliation for the

14 exercise of a constitutional right, malicious prosecution, and conspiracy. See ECF No. 256 at 1; see also

15 ECF Nos. 76 & 77. Before the Court for consideration are six defense motions in limine (ECF No. 269)

16 as well as eight filed by Plaintiff (ECF No. 272). In addition, the parties have filed various motions

17 objecting to content in and requesting amendment of the Pretrial Order. ECF Nos. 283, 283, 286.

II. BACKGROUND

19 For purposes of evaluating the present motion, the Court sets forth the following general outline

20 of the facts as described in the findings and recommendations addressing Defendants’ motion for

21 summary judgment, which based its factual summary on material that was, at that time, undisputed or

22 supported by admissible…

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.