Rukhsana Chaudhry v. City of Los Angeles

MEMORANDUM

On March 25, 2008, Los Angeles Police Officer Joseph Cruz shot and killed Mohammad Usman Chaudhry (“Usman”). Usman’s estate, his parents (“the Chau-dhrys”), and his siblings (“the Siblings”), brought a number of claims against Cruz and various other defendants connected with the City and County of Los Angeles. Eventually, some of the estate’s and the Chaudhrys’ claims against Cruz and the City went to trial. Before trial, the district court disposed of the plaintiffs’ other claims in favor of the various defendants.

This appeal presents many issues, a number of which we address in a published opinion filed concurrently with this memorandum disposition. In this memorandum disposition, we address issues not addressed in our opinion.

A. Federal Constitutional Claims

1. Substantive Due Process. The Chaudhrys were not sufficiently deprived of their interest in the “possession], control, [and] disposition]” of Usman’s remains, New man v. Sathyavaglswaran, 287 F.3d 786 , 796 (9th Cir.2002), to support a substantive due process claim. California law creates a right to possession of a body for burial, but it does not create a right to burial on whatever terms the family…