Bloom v. City of Scottsdale

977 F.2d 587 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Andrew B. BLOOM, Adelle S. Bloom, Steven Bloom and Stacy Bloom, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CITY OF SCOTTSDALE, and its Elected Officials, et al., Defendants, and Frank Hylton; Bernard Hill; Patrick Sasone, Defendants-Appellants. No. 91-15472. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted April 15, 1992. Decided Oct. 2, 1992. Before FLETCHER, POOLE and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Bernie Hill, Patrick Sasone and Frank Hylton, officers in the Scottsdale, Arizona police department, appeal a judgment of $75,000 against them in a suit filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by members of the Bloom family. They argue the district court erred in directing a verdict against them on the issue of liability, and in refusing to instruct the jury on their qualified immunity defense. Additionally, they contend that the jury's award of damages was not supported by the evidence. We affirm in part and…