Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California adopted the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation concerning defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment on the plaintiff’s illegal extraction claim but denied it as to excessive force claims against Lizarraga, Galindo, and Montejano.
Holdings
- Heck did not require summary judgment because the criminal jury did not necessarily find that the defendants before the court acted lawfully.
- Summary judgment was denied on the excessive-force claims against Lizarraga, Galindo, and Montejano.
- Defendants were entitled to summary judgment on Green's illegal-extraction claim.
Questions Presented
- Whether Heck v. Humphrey barred Green's claims because the criminal jury's verdict necessarily established that defendants acted lawfully.
- Whether summary judgment was proper on Green's excessive-force claims against Lizarraga, Galindo, and Montejano.
- Whether summary judgment was proper on Green's illegal-extraction claim.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (3)
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)(applied)
- King v. R. Villegas, No. 23-1713, 2025 WL 2950508, at *7 (9th Cir. Oct. 20, 2025)(followed)
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007)(applied)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…