Legal Opinion
Christie v. Iopa
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 1, 1999No. 98-16547PublishedCited by 326 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GRABER, Circuit Judge:
In this action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs allege that a deputy prosecutor for the County of Hawaii violated their constitutional rights. The district court granted the County’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the County is not legally responsible for the deputy prosecutor’s acts. For the reasons that follow, we affirm as to plaintiff Christie, but reverse as to plaintiff Anderson.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Because the district court granted summary judgment, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- City of Canton v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Board of the County Commissioners of Bryan County v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Pembaur v. City of CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by326 opinions
- John R. Ulrich, Jr., M.D. v. City and County of San Francisco Laguna Honda Hospital Maria v. Rivero, M.D. Theresa Berta, M.D. Melissa Welch, M.D.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Burch v. Regents of the University of CaliforniaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2006
- Alfonso Blake v. Renee BakerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Kennedy v. City of RidgefieldCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Lytle v. CarlCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
321 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.