Loggervale

Loggervale v. County of Alameda

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 14, 20233:20-cv-04679California1,573 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AASYLEI LOGGERVALE, AAOTTAE LOGGERVALE, and AASYLEI HARDGE- LOGGERVALE, No. C 20-04679 WHA

Plaintiffs,

v.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’

RULE 59 MOTION TO ALTER

STEVEN HOLLAND, MONICA POPE, JUDGMENT and COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, 15 Defendants.

INTRODUCTION In this Section 1983 and Bane Act action involving unlawful detention, plaintiffs move under Rule 59(e) to alter the judgment to include pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and a Bane Act statutory penalty. For the following reasons, their motion is DENIED. STATEMENT The underlying facts of this matter have been recounted elsewhere (Dkt. No. 304). In short, plaintiffs, one mother and two daughters, all African American, sued the County of Alameda and two deputies after they were detained and hand-cuffed in separate patrol cars for 91 minutes. After a six-day trial, the jury found in favor of plaintiffs and awarded a total of $8.25 26 …

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.