-GGH (PS) Arnold v. County of El Dorado, No. 2:2010cv03119 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/12/11 ORDERING that the Findings and Recommendations filed March 15, 2011, are ADOPTED and: 1) Defendants' motion to dismiss, filed on January 28, 2011 8 , is denied in all respects except as set f orth in (2), (3) and (4) below; 2. All claims with respect to unlawful arrest are dismissed with prejudice; 3. The first cause of action (Monell) is dismissed as to defendant County of El Dorado with leave to amend; 4. To the extent that the third cause of action is any different from the first, and plaintiff is attempting to allege a Monell claim, it too is dismissed with leave to amend; and 5. If plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, she shall do so within fourteen (14) days of this order; if no amended complaint is filed within that time period, defendants shall file and serve an answer to the remaining claims within fourteen (14) days thereafter.(Becknal, R)

Download PDF
-GGH (PS) Arnold v. County of El Dorado Doc. 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PENNY ARNOLD, Plaintiff, 11 vs. 12 13 CIV-S-10-3119 KJM GGH PS COUNTY OF EL DORADO, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 __________________________________/ In this case, plaintiff is proceeding pro se on civil rights and related claims against 16 17 ORDER El Dorado County and two deputy sheriffs. 18 On March 15, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, 19 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 20 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections have been filed.1 Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 21 22 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 23 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 24 1983). 25 1 26 On May 16, 2011, plaintiff did file a proposed order adopting the findings and recommendations, which the court has reviewed. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Findings and Recommendations in full. 3 4 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendations filed March 15, 2011, are ADOPTED and 5 6 1. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, filed on January 28, 2011 (ECF 8), is denied in all respects except as set forth in (2), (3) and (4) below; 7 2. All claims with respect to unlawful arrest are dismissed with prejudice; 8 3. The first cause of action (Monell) is dismissed as to defendant County of El 9 Dorado with leave to amend; 10 11 4. To the extent that the third cause of action is any different from the first, and plaintiff is attempting to allege a Monell claim, it too is dismissed with leave to amend; and 12 5. If plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, she shall do so within 13 fourteen (14) days of this order; if no amended complaint is filed within that time period, 14 defendants shall file and serve an answer to the remaining claims within fourteen (14) days 15 thereafter. 16 DATED: September 12, 2011. 17 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 arnold3119.jo 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.