Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00653/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00653-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Channel Centeno
Plaintiff
Heriberta Centeno
Plaintiff
Jose Centeno
Plaintiff
City of Fresno
Defendant
Felipe Miguel Lucero
Defendant
Zebulon Price
Defendant

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHANNEL CENTENO; HERIBERTA 

CENTENO; JOSE CENTENO, 

individually,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITY OF FRESNO; ZEBULON PRICE; 

FELIPE MIGUEL LUCERO; and DOES 1 

through 50, inclusive,

Defendants.

No. 1:16-cv-00653-DAD-SAB

HERIBERTA CENTENO AND JOSE 

CENTENO HAVE BEEN DISMISSED WITH 

PREJUDICE FROM THE FIRST, SECOND, 

AND FOURTH CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

(Doc. No. 13)

On June 10, 2016, the parties filed a joint stipulation for dismissal with prejudice of 

Heriberta Centeno and Jose Centeno from the first, second, and fourth claims for relief, and with 

each party to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. (Doc. No. 13.) See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1997). In light of the 

parties’ stipulation,

1. Plaintiffs Heriberta Centeno and Jose Centeno have been dismissed with prejudice from 

the first claim for relief;

2. Plaintiffs Heriberta Centeno and Jose Centeno have been dismissed with prejudice from 

the second claim for relief;

/////

Case 1:16-cv-00653-DAD-SAB Document 14 Filed 06/13/16 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

3. Plaintiffs Heriberta Centeno and Jose Centeno have been dismissed with prejudice from 

the fourth claim for relief;

4. The parties have mutually waived and released all such aforementioned claims – including 

all claims for liability or damages or otherwise by any of the plaintiffs against any of the 

defendants or their agents or employees – and have mutually waived and released all 

costs, court fees, and attorneys’ fees arising out of this litigation between these parties 

thereto as to the aforementioned dismissed claims;

5. Nothing in this order shall be construed as preventing any remaining parties to this action 

from calling any of the former parties listed in the stipulation as witnesses at the time of 

trial or for other proceedings in this action;

6. In light of these dismissals, plaintiffs’ operative remaining claims in this action are now 

solely as follows:

a. The first claim for relief for wrongful death by negligent tactics and negligent use of 

Force upon decedent Freddy Centeno, pursuant to Cal. Gov. Code §§ 815.2 and 820 

by plaintiff Channel Centeno (on decedent’s behalf) against defendants City of Fresno, 

FPD Officer Zebulon Price, and FPD Officer Miguel Lucero, and Supervisory Doe 

Defendants 1-10;

b. The second claim for relief for excessive force (deadly) in violation Fourth 

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution upon decedent Freddy Centeno, pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983, by plaintiffs Channel Centeno (on decedent’s behalf) against 

defendants FPD Officer Zebulon Price and FPD Officer Miguel Lucero;

c. The third claim for relief for substantive due process violation: deprivation of familial 

relations with decedent Freddy Centeno in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to 

the U.S. Constitution, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, by plaintiffs Channel Centeno, 

Jose Centeno, and Heriberta Centeno (each on their own behalf) against defendants 

FPD Officer Zebulon Price and FPD Officer Miguel Lucero, and Supervisory Doe 

Defendants 1-5; and

/////

Case 1:16-cv-00653-DAD-SAB Document 14 Filed 06/13/16 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

d. The fourth claim for relief for municipal liability (Monell claim), pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983, by plaintiff Channel Centeno against defendants City of Fresno, and 

Supervisory Doe Defendants 6-10. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 12, 2016 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00653-DAD-SAB Document 14 Filed 06/13/16 Page 3 of 3