Brian Ballentine v. Christopher Tucker

Good Law
28 F.4th 54
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 8, 202220-16805California5,397 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BRIAN BALLENTINE; CATALINO No. 20-16805

DAZO; KELLY PATTERSON,

Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. 2:14-cv-01584- and APG-EJY

GAIL SACCO,

Plaintiff, OPINION

v.

CHRISTOPHER T. TUCKER, Detective, Defendant-Appellee,

and

LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE

DEPARTMENT; MIKE WALLACE,

Sergeant; JOHN LIBERTY, Lieutenant, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Andrew P. Gordon, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted October 21, 2021 San Francisco, California Filed March 8, 2022

Before: Mary H. Murguia, Chief Judge, and J. Clifford Wallace and Carlos T. Bea, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge Wallace

SUMMARY *

Civil Rights

The panel affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s summary judgment, on qualified immunity grounds, for Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Detective Christopher Tucker in an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging, in part, that Tucker violated plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights when he arrested them in retaliation for their chalking…

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.