Linda K. Wood v. Steven C. Ostrander Neil Maloney

Linda Wood brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Washington State Trooper Steven Ostrander and his wife, and Neil Maloney, Chief Officer of the Washington State Patrol and his wife. Wood appeals the district court’s summary judgment dismissal of the case as to all defendants. We affirm the district court’s dismissal as to Maloney and his wife, but reverse the dismissal as to Ostrander and his wife.

FACTS

At 2:30 a.m., on the morning of September 23, 1984, Trooper Ostrander pulled a car to the side of the road for driying with its high beams on. Ostrander determined that the driver, Robert Bell, was intoxicated and placed him under arrest. Ostrander called for a tow truck to have the car impounded, and returned to the car and removed the keys. Wood, who was sitting in the car, asked Ostrander how she would get home. Ostrander replied that he was sorry, but that Wood would have to get out of the car. These facts are not disputed. Wood claims that Ostrander simply returned to his patrol car and drove away. Ostrander claims that he offered to call a friend or family member who could give Wood a ride home, but that she declined the offer. Although Wood claims that she…

dissenting:

I disagree with the amended opinion issued following rehearing. The reasons expressed in my prior dissent remain as stated in Wood v. Ostrander, 851 F.2d 1212, 1220 (9th Cir.1988) and as supplemented by further review of the qualified immunity issue. Additional concerns are prompted by two opinions of the United States Supreme Court issued since this matter was reargued on November 23,1988, DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. Soc. Servs. Dept., — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 998 , 103 L.Ed.2d 249 (1989) and Canton v. Harris, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 1197 , 103 L.Ed.2d 412 (1989).

The basic (initial) issue to be addressed in this case is whether Ostrander arguably violated Wood’s liberty rights under the substantive component of the Due Process Clause. The majority opinion concludes as a matter of law that:

Ergo, the majority opinion concludes, “We are satisfied that Wood has presented genuine issues of material fact on the question of whether Ostrander deprived her of a liberty interest protected by the Constitution. See Ingraham v. Wright, supra: Haygood v. Younger, 769 F.2d at 1356.” I do not agree with this conclusion for the reasons stated in this dissent.

The first of two other…

879 F.2d 583 58 USLW 2070 Linda K. WOOD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Steven C. OSTRANDER; Neil Maloney, Defendants-Appellees. No. 87-3924. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 3, 1988. Reargued and Resubmitted on Rehearing Nov. 28, 1988. Decided June 27, 1989. Paul Lindenmuth and Neil J. Hoff, Tacoma, Wash., for plaintiff-appellant. Theresa L. Fricke, Asst. Atty. Gen., Olympia, Wash., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Before FLETCHER and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges, * and CARROLL, District Judge. ** DAVID R. THOMPSON, Circuit Judge: 1 Linda Wood brought this action under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 against Washington State Trooper Steven Ostrander and his wife, and Neil Maloney, Chief Officer of the Washington State Patrol and his wife. Wood appeals the district court's summary judgment dismissal of the case as to all defendants. We affirm the district court's dismissal as to Maloney and his wife, but reverse the dismissal as to Ostrander and his wife. 1 FACTS 2 At 2:30 a.m., on the morning of September 23, 1984, Trooper Ostrander pulled a car to the side of the road for driving with…