Mark Dickerson v. City of Portland

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 18, 202220-36121California589 words

Opinion

Opinion

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

MAR 18 2022

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARK DICKERSON, No. 20-36121

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:19-cv-01126-SB

v.

MEMORANDUM*

CITY OF PORTLAND; MULTNOMAH

COUNTY; MATT JACOBSEN; JOHN

DOES, 1-15,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Stacie F. Beckerman, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 18, 2022 ** San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE, FERNANDEZ, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiff Mark Dickerson appeals pro se from the district court’s summary

judgment in favor of Defendants City of Portland (City), Multnomah County

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). (County), Officer Matt Jacobsen, and fifteen John Does. Dickerson brought this

civil rights action and related Oregon claims alleging that he was…

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.