Legal Opinion

Heidi Hazelquist v. Stephan

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 15, 2017No. 15-35863Unpublished

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM *

Heidi Hazelquist appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims arising from an arrest and involuntary commitment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Ramirez v. City of Buena Park, 560 F.3d 1012, 1019 (9th Cir. 2009), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendant Stephan on Hazelquist’s unlawful seizure claim because Hazelquist failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether there was no probable cause for her arrest. See…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Michael Lacey v. Joseph ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
  2. Padgett v. WrightCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  3. United States v. Dennis Edward EliasCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
  4. Ramirez v. City of Buena ParkCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  5. Luchtel v. HagemannCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API