Hill

Hill v. City of Sacramento

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 19, 202624-4185California442 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 19 2026

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ARNITHA HILL; TIANA No. 24-4185 FIELDS; ANTHONY D.C. No. 2:22-cv-01625-DJC-AC

GRANDERSON; BREJONNA

GRANDERSON; MONTREAL

GRANDERSON; UNIQUE FIELDS, MEMORANDUM*

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO; ROBERT

HAMM, Sgt. #3018; DELGADO, Officer #358; BRETT MELLOCH, Officer #602; DEREK CALABRESE, Officer 1005; ERICK NEDELJKOVIC; JOSEPH SWALEH, Officer 900,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Daniel J. Calabretta, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 18, 2026**

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Before: CALLAHAN, FRIEDLAND, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Arnitha Hill, Tiana Fields, Anthony Granderson, Brejonna…

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.