From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodrigues v. Jackson Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Jan 29, 2015
No. 1:13-cv-1589-CL (D. Or. Jan. 29, 2015)

Opinion

No. 1:13-cv-1589-CL

01-29-2015

TRAVIS RODRIGUES, Plaintiff, v. JACKSON COUNTY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

PANNER, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation (R&R), and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Although no objections have been filed, this court reviews legal principles de novo. See Shiny Rock Mining Corp. v. United States, 825 F.2d 216, 218 & n.1. (9th Cir. 1987). I agree with the R&R that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment should be denied and Defendants' motion for summary judgment should be granted in part.

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#74) is adopted. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (#36, #69) is granted as to Plaintiff's claim for negligence and denied as to Plaintiff's claims for excessive force and battery. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (#40) is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 29 day of january, 2015.

/s/_________

OWEN M. PANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Rodrigues v. Jackson Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Jan 29, 2015
No. 1:13-cv-1589-CL (D. Or. Jan. 29, 2015)
Case details for

Rodrigues v. Jackson Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:TRAVIS RODRIGUES, Plaintiff, v. JACKSON COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION

Date published: Jan 29, 2015

Citations

No. 1:13-cv-1589-CL (D. Or. Jan. 29, 2015)

Citing Cases

Stade v. Or. Dep't of Human Servs.

But “allegations of intentional conduct do not support a claim for negligence.” Rodrigues v. Jackson …

Pettibone v. Biden

Allegations of conduct that can only be intentional cannot give rise to a negligence claim. Id.; Rodrigues v.…