Rogelio Hechavarria v. City and County of San Francis
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Rogelio Hechavarria appeals the summary judgment entered by the district court against him. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the history of the case, we need not recount it here.
I
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Hechavarria’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against the City and County of San Francisco (the City). As an initial inquiry to any § 1983 claim, we ensure that “two essential elements ... are present: (1) whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) whether this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 535 , 101 S.Ct. 1908 , 68 L.Ed.2d 420 (1981), overruled on other grounds by Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327 , 106 S.Ct. 662 , 88 L.Ed.2d 662 (1986). In this case, summary judgment was appropriate because Hechavarria did not show that City Parking Control Officer Elias Georgopoulos’s assault constituted either an action under color of state law, or a deprivation of his constitutional rights.