Legal Opinion
Richard Ceballos v. Gil Garcetti Frank Sundstedt Carol Najera County of Los Angeles
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 22, 2004No. 02-55418PublishedCited by 67 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REINHARDT, Circuit Judge:
Richard Ceballos filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 contending that he was subjected to adverse employment actions by his supervisors at the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office in retaliation for engaging in speech protected by the First Amendment. He also asserts that the county fails to train, supervise, and discipline its district attorneys regarding such unlawful retaliation.
The district court granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of the individual defendants — the District Attorney (in his individual capacity), the then-Head Deputy…
2Cases cited59 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by67 opinions
- Michael Lacey v. Joseph ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Garcetti v. CeballosSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Wolfe v. StrankmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Wolfe v. StrankmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- McGreevy v. StroupCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.