Legal Opinion

ESTATE OF AMARO v. City of Oakland

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 28, 2011No. 10-16152PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BEA, Circuit Judge:

This interlocutory appeal requires us to resolve only the following question certified by the district court: whether the doctrine of equitable estoppel should apply where a plaintiff believes she has a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim but is dissuaded from bringing the claim by affirmative misrepresentations and stonewalling by the police. We hold that the equitable doctrine does apply in such a context and affirm the district court’s holding on that legal question. 1

Background

On March 23, 2000, Jerry Amaro — a 36-year old Oakland resident — was arrested during a reverse drug…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Johnson v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. James F. Santa Maria v. Pacific BellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  3. UA Local 343 of the United Ass'n v. Nor-Cal Plumbing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  4. Stitt v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
  5. Alex Wayne Bolt v. United States of America, U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Ptarmigan Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Geraldine Burley v. Jeffery GagackiCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
  2. Mashaney v. Board of Indigents' Defense ServicesSupreme Court of Kansas · 2015
  3. Gessele v. Jack in the Box, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2014
  4. Candor v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2014
  5. Thiel v. VenemanDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2012

38 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