Richard Blaisdell v. Ben Griego
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Richard Blaisdell, a Hawaii state prisoner housed in Arizona, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment following a jury verdict in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s evidentiary rulings. Harper v. City of Los Angeles, 533 F.3d 1010, 1030 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding trial evidence concerning Blaisdell’s other lawsuits and claims against the prison because it limited the scope of the exclusion in the manner recommended by Blaisdell. See Fed. R.Evid. 103(a) (when the court excludes evidence, a party must inform the court of its substance by an offer of proof in order to claim error); Price v. Kramer, 200 F.3d 1237, 1252 (9th Cir.2000) (failure to object to evidence at trial on the specific basis raised on appeal results in waiver).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by permitting Blaisdell’s treating physician to testify at trial because the testimony that Blaisdell objected to either was relevant to Blaisdell’s claim or did not “ ‘substantially…