John Ronald Bertram v. George Deukmejian

Good Law
9 F.3d 1550·1993 WL 451274·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 36200
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 4, 199393-15092California426 words

Opinion

Opinion

9 F.3d 1550 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. John Ronald BERTRAM, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George DEUKMEJIAN, et al., Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-15092. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 1, 1993. * Decided Nov. 4, 1993. 1 Before: KOZINSKI and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges, and KELLEHER, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 When individuals act in their capacities as state employees they enjoy qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 "insofar as their conduct [did] not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). A prisoner's right to marry was not a clearly established constitutional right until after Bertram's alleged deprivation, when the Supreme Court decided Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987). Turner was decided in June 1987, while all of the appellants' actions took place before or during May 1987.…

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.