Estate of Clemente Najera Aguirre v. County of Riverside

Good Law
131 F.4th 702
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 11, 202523-55718California3,801 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKeown, J.

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ESTATE OF CLEMENTE NAJERA No. 23-55718

AGUIRRE; J.S.; A.S.; Y.S.,

D.C. No. 5:18-cv- Plaintiffs-Appellees, 00762-DMG-SP

v.

OPINION

COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE; DAN

PONDER,

Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Dolly M. Gee, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted September 17, 2024 Seattle, Washington

Filed March 11, 2025

Before: M. Margaret McKeown, Ronald M. Gould, Circuit Judges, and Jane A. Restani *, Judge.

Opinion by Judge McKeown

* The Honorable Jane A. Restani, Judge for the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. ESTATE OF NAJERA-AGUIRRE V. CITY OF RIVERSIDE

SUMMARY **

Excessive Force

The panel affirmed the district court’s order denying Riverside County Sergeant Dan Ponder’s renewed motion, following a jury verdict, for judgment as a matter of law based on qualified immunity in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that Ponder used excessive force when he shot and killed Clemente Najera-Aguirre. Ponder arrived at the scene after responding to a call about…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.