Gibson
Gibson v. City of Portland
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 29, 202624-1663California23,603 words
Opinion
Opinion
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSEPH GIBSON and RUSSEL No. 24-1663
SCHULTZ,
D.C. No. 3:23- Plaintiffs-Appellants, cv-00833-HZ
v.
OPINION
CITY OF PORTLAND;
MULTNOMAH COUNTY;
MULTNOMAH COUNTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE;
CHRISTOPHER TRAYNOR; ROD
UNDERHILL; MIKE SCHMIDT;
BRAD KALBAUGH; and SEAN
HUGHEY,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Marco A. Hernandez, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted April 1, 2025 Portland, Oregon
Filed January 29, 2026 Before: Jay S. Bybee, Kenneth K. Lee, and Danielle J. Forrest, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by Judge Bybee; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Forrest
SUMMARY *
Shotgun Pleading / Immunity
The panel affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s dismissal of an action alleging that Defendants-Appellees—Multnomah County, the City of Portland, the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office (MCDA), two former district attorneys, two deputy district attorneys, and a Portland police detective—conspired to arrest and prosecute Plaintiffs without probable cause to silence…