Lund

Lund v. Murphy

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 13, 202624-7153California1,064 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 13 2026

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ERIC LUND, No. 24-7153 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellant, 5:21-cv-01083-JGB-DTB v. MEMORANDUM*

K. MURPHY; BRIAN DAVIS,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND

REHABILITATION,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Jesus G. Bernal, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted February 5, 2026 Pasadena, California

Before: GRABER, BRESS, and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges.

Eric Lund brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that Officer Keetha

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Murphy and Lieutenant Brian Davis violated Lund’s constitutional rights and

California’s Bane Act when they investigated Lund for conspiring to introduce a

controlled substance into prison and transferred him to administrative segregation.

The…

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.