Doe
Doe v. County of Sacramento
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 MARIA DOE, et al, 2:21-cv-01438-MCE-CKD 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants.
16
17 18 In granting most of plaintiffs’ February 15, 2023, motion to compel and its November 8, 19 2023, motion to compel, the court reserved ruling on the requests for sanctions in the form of 20 attorney fees under Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs request a total of 21 $22,525.00 for 53 hours worked at an hourly rate of $425.00. For the reasons set forth below, the 22 court orders defendants County of Sacramento, Sacramento Sheriff’s Office, and Darryl Roderick 23 (“defendants”) to pay a total of $11,645.00 ($3,825.00 + $7,820.00) in attorney fees to plaintiffs’ 24 counsel. 25 I. Background 26 The plaintiffs in this action allege they were coerced into vacating their apartment without 27 legal process by Sacramento County Sheriff’s Deputy Darryl Roderick, who refused to provide 28 interpretation. (ECF No. 69 at 6.)…