IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 6, 2009
PETER T. HARRELL, PLAINTIFF,
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
Plaintiff, proceeding in pro per, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules.
On February 6, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within a specified time. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed.
The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge's analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed February 6, 2009, are adopted in full;
2. The motion to dismiss (Doc. 14) is granted in part and denied in part;
3. Plaintiff's state law claims for malicious prosecution, right to privacy, emotional distress, and negligent investigation are dismissed as the defendant is immune from the prosecution of these claims pursuant to California Government Code § 821.6;
4. Plaintiff is allowed to proceed on his state law claim for negligence; and
5. Plaintiff is allowed to proceed on his claim for punitive damages.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.