Klock

Klock v. Cain

Good Law
813 F. Supp. 1430·1993 WL 48213
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaFebruary 17, 1993CV 91-0163 AWTCalifornia1,843 words

Opinion

Opinion

Tashima, J.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This case has been tried once and, because of a hung jury, has been set for a retrial. This is an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for asserted violation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights. One of the constitutional rights of which plaintiff claims he was deprived is the right not to be “deported” from the City of Hemet. He alleges that defendants, who are police officers of the City of Hemet, forcibly put him in a patrol car, drove him to the city limits and left him by the side of the road, just outside the city limits. As stated by plaintiff in the motion now under consideration, “Plaintiff claims that he has a right not to have been taken, against his will, outside the jurisdiction of the City of Banning [sic.].”

At the trial, the court dismissed this claim based on application of the qualified immunity defense. The court ruled that this constitutional right (assuming its existence) was not “clearly established” at the time of the events in question, as required by Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), to defeat the immunity. In anticipation of the retrial, plaintiff has moved for reconsideration…

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.