Fink-Carver

Fink-Carver v. Kuhn

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 4, 20234:21-cv-00664California2,766 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

23 Plaintiff Jennifer Fink-Carver (Fink-Carver) and Plaintiff Jason Fink (Fink) (collectively, 24 Plaintiffs) allege that Defendant City of Pleasant Hill and Defendant City of Pleasant Hill Police 25 Department (PHPD) Officer Kuhn violated their constitutional rights. Specifically, Plaintiffs 26 allege that Officer Kuhn and other officers were called to Fink-Carver’s house, and, without cause 27 or justification, entered her home. Compl. ¶¶ 3–4, EFC No. 1. Upon entry, Plaintiffs allege that officers slammed Fink-Carver to the couch and Officer Kuhn deployed a police canine that bit her leg. Id. ¶ 4. Plaintiffs allege Fink arrived outside the house and, without cause or justification, officers took Fink to the ground, officers remained on top of him, and Officer Kuhn deployed a police canine that bit Fink’s low back, hip, and leg. Id. ¶ 6. Plaintiffs assert twelve claims, individually asserting causes of action against (1) Defendant Officer Kuhn under the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for unreasonable force, unlawful seizure, and unlawful arrest, (2) the City of Pleasant Hill and Does 1 through 20 for supervisory…

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.