Provencio, et al. v. Vasquez, et al., No. 1:2007cv00069 - Document 207 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER Adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In Full Granting In Part And Denying In Part Motion For Summary Judgment Filed By Defendants Vazquez, Palmer, Hicks, Drugich And Paredes (Document # 173 , 202 ), signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 7/21/2010. (Scrivner, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Provencio, et al. v. Vasquez, et al. Doc. 207 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 DANIEL PROVENCIO, JR., personally and as successor in interest to DANIEL PROVENCIO, deceased, by his guardian ad litem, Maria Lucero, et al., ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) PATRICIA L. VAZQUEZ, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) NO. 1:07-CV-00069 AWI JLT ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED BY DEFENDANTS VAZQUEZ, PALMER, HICKS, DRUGICH AND PAREDES [Document #173, 202] 17 18 Plaintiffs filed this civil rights action seeing relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 15, 19 2010, Defendants Vazquez, Palmer, Lawless, Hicks, Drugich, Short, Ramos and Paredes filed a 20 motion for summary judgment1. On May 13, 2010, the court referred the matter to the Magistrate 21 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and Local Rule 302. 22 On June 16, 2010, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations that 23 recommended granting the motion for summary judgment as to defendants Vazquez, Lawless, 24 Hicks, Drugich, Short, Ramos and Paredes, but denying the motion for summary judgment as to 25 defendant Palmer. The parties were granted 14 days from June 16, 2010, to file objections to the 26 27 28 1 The motion is styled as brought by Defendants Vazquez, Palmer, Hicks, Drugich, Short, Ramos, Lawless and Paredes. However, on March 1, 2010 (Doc. # 162), summary judgment was granted in favor of Defendants Ramos, Lawless and Short. Dockets.Justia.com 1 Recommendation. The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiffs by mail on 2 June 16, 2010. Plaintiffs filed objections on July 5, 2010. 3 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley 4 United School Dist., 708 F.2d 452 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court has conducted a de novo review of 5 the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Findings and 6 Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 8 1. 9 10 FULL; 2. 11 12 The findings/report and recommendations filed June 16, 2010, are ADOPTED IN Defendants Vazquez, Hicks, Drugich, and Paredes are granted summary judgment; and 3. Defendant Palmer’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 Dated: 0m8i78 July 21, 2010 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.
