Dang Vang Yia Moua Yang Xiong Maichao Vang v. Vang Xiong X. Toyed, Individually and in His Capacity as Refugee Counselor

Bad Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 10857·944 F.2d 476·1991 WL 168658·34 Fed. R. Serv. 266·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 20564
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 5, 199190-35254California3,282 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brunetti, J.

Vang Xiong Toyed (“Xiong”) appeals from a judgment entered after a jury verdict against him in a suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (§ 1983). Plaintiffs, along with their spouses, brought this action against Xiong, a Washington State employee, asserting he raped them during the course of his employment. Appellant argues that the verdict is faulty because there was no evidence he was acting under “color of state law.” He also argues the trial court erroneously admitted the testimony of three expert witnesses and that such testimony was prejudicial. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

I. Facts and Proceedings

The parties in this case are Hmong refugees from Laos. Appellee Yia Moua (“Moua”) moved with her family to Spokane, Washington in 1979. In 1981 she sought employment and was referred to Xiong who was employed by the Washington State Employment Security office. Xiong was responsible for interviewing and finding refugees suitable employment. Moua apparently filed an application and was interviewed by Xiong, but was unsuccessful in obtaining a job.

In 1983 Moua contacted Xiong to assist her in learning to drive and in passing the Washington driver’s license…

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.