Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Jones v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided October 20, 2017No. 14-17388Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partN.R. Smith, Circuit Judge
I cannot conclude, as the majority does, that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claims because the Plaintiffs failed to name the proper party in interest.1 “A district court abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law, when it rests its decision on clearly erroneous findings of fact, or when we are left with a definite and firm conviction that the district court committed a clear error of judgment.” United States v. 4.85 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in Lincoln Cty., Mont., 546 F.3d 613, 617 (9th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Advanced Magnetics, Inc. v. Bayfront Partners, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Kode v. CarlsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- United States of America for the Use and Benefit of Robert Wulff and Caitlyn Wulff, Husband and Wife v. Cma, Inc. And Reliance Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- United States v. 4.85 Acres of LandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Rust v. Clark County School DistrictNevada Supreme Court · 1987