Legal Opinion

Christie v. Barats

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided April 11, 2003No. 02-16049; D.C. No. CV-00-00451-HDMPublished

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM**

Walter and Charmaine Christie appeal pro se the district court’s summary judgment in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violation of their Fourth and Fifth amendment rights. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. See Case v. Kitsap County Sheriffs Dept., 249 F.3d 921, 925 (9th Cir.2001).

The facts are known to the parties and need not be fully recited. Walter Christie maintains that he is not an ex-felon, and that he has no legal obligation to apply to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Cool Fuel, Incorporated v. William H. Connett, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  2. Creps v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Hand v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API