Summerfield v. Holcomb

26 F.3d 132 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Janet SUMMERFIELD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William R. HOLCOMB; the City of San Bernardino, a political sub-division of the State of California; Esther Estrada, Ralph Hernandez, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-55400. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 6, 1994. * Decided June 14, 1994. Before: FARRIS, O'SCANNLAIN, and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 We have jurisdiction of the timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and we affirm. 3 * We review de novo the district court's dismissal of Summerfield's claims against the city under 42 U.S.C. Secs. 1983 & 1985(3). Oscar v. University Students Co-operative Ass'n, 965 F.2d 783, 785 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 655 (1992). 4 With regard to her section 1983 claims against the city, although Summerfield states that defendants were "top policy makers," she does not allege that defendants were responsible for…