Domingo Roque Molina v. Paul T. Richardson and the City of Los Angeles

Molina appeals from the judgment of the district court dismissing his civil-rights claim against the City of Los Angeles for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and denying him attorney’s fees for his successful action against two *847 policemen employed by the city. We affirm the dismissal of the claim against the city and vacate and remand the judgment with respect to the denial of attorney’s fees.

I. The Facts

On July 1, 1973, Molina was stopped by two policemen while driving his automobile in Los Angeles. The officers had noticed that the rear of Molina’s car was damaged and that a current registration tab was not attached to the rear license plate. Molina complied with their request to produce the registration tab which he had inside the car, explaining that he intended to attach it to the license plate after the damage to his vehicle was repaired. The officers then asked to see his driver’s license. Molina held up his wallet, displaying his license through a clear plastic container, but he refused to hand it over as directed. The parties disagree as to whether the officers then told Molina to get out of his car, but it is agreed that they eventually…

dissenting:

I dissent from that portion of the opinion in which the majority takes the position that the extension of the Bivens doctrine to allow a cause of action against the city directly under the Fourteenth Amendment is not constitutionally required and, further, that as a matter of judicial discretion it would not be appropriate. While I would agree, (in light of the holdings in several other Circuits, see e. g., Gagliardi v. Flint, 564 F.2d 112 (3rd Cir. 1977); Calvin v. Conlisk, 520 F.2d 1 (7th Cir. 1975); Williams v. Brown, 398 F.Supp. 155 (N.D.Ill.1975), and amidst strong indications from the Supreme Court, City of Kenosha v. Bruno, 412 U.S. 507 , 93 S.Ct. 2222 , 37 L.Ed.2d 109 (1973)), that the Bivens result is not constitutionally required, I cannot agree that it is inappropriate to supply a remedy for the alleged violation of Molina’s constitutional rights directly under the Fourteenth Amendment.

I agree with the majority that the recent decision by the Supreme Court in Monell v. Department of Social Services, - U.S. -, 98 S.Ct. 2018 , 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978), does not give Plaintiff-Appellant Molina a Section 1983 cause of action against the *855 city. However, I…

578 F.2d 846 Domingo Roque MOLINA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Paul T. RICHARDSON and the City of Los Angeles, Defendant-Appellee. No. 76-2810. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. July 21, 1978. Michael R. Mitchell (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. Michael K. Fox, Deputy City Atty. (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before WRIGHT and WALLACE, Circuit Judges, and GRANT, * District Judge. WALLACE, Circuit Judge: 1 Molina appeals from the judgment of the district court dismissing his civil-rights claim against the City of Los Angeles for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and denying him attorney's fees for his successful action against two policemen employed by the city. We affirm the dismissal of the claim against the city and vacate and remand the judgment with respect to the denial of attorney's fees. I. The Facts 2 On July 1, 1973, Molina was stopped by two policemen while driving his automobile in Los Angeles. The officers had noticed that the rear of Molina's car was damaged and that a current registration tab was not attached…