Santana v. County of Los Angeles

Filed 3/23/06 Santana v. County of Los Angeles CA2/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Paul G. Flynn, Judge. Affirmed.

The Beck Law Firm and Thomas E. Beck for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland, Martin Stein, Carolyn Oill and Lillie Hsu for Defendants and Respondents County of Los Angeles and Brian Nelson.

Law Offices of William S. Loomis and William Scott Loomis for Defendant and Respondent Paul Thomas Dillon.

* * * * * *

Appellant Abraham Santana appeals from a judgment entered after a jury trial on his claims for civil rights violations under 42 United States Code section 1983 and related state claims against respondents Paul Dillon (Dillon), the County of Los Angeles (the County) and Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Brian Nelson (Nelson) (collectively, respondents). The trial court granted Dillon's motion for a directed verdict and awarded Dillon attorney fees of $50,148. The trial court also directed a verdict in favor of the County on appellant's claims under Monell v. New York Dept. of Social Services (1978) 436 U.S. 658 (Monell).

The jury returned a verdict against appellant on the remaining claims, in favor of the County and Nelson. We affirm the judgment.

CONTENTIONS

Appellant contends the trial court: (1) denied him a fair trial by its biased and prejudicial conduct; (2) improperly excluded evidence; (3) improperly admitted evidence of â€