P.B.

P.B. v. Koch

Good Law
96 Daily Journal DAR 11891·96 F.3d 1298·1996 WL 547829·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 25256·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7235
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 27, 1996No. 95-35056California3,905 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Defendant Alfred Koch, the principal of Preston High School, a public high school in Preston, Idaho, appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion for summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity. Three students, N.B., L.G., and D.D., sued Koch for use of excessive force. N.B. claims that Koch slapped him in the face and grabbed his neck. L.G. claims that Koch grabbed him by the neck and punched him in the chest. D.D. claims that Koch grabbed him by the neck and threw him head first into the lockers. Koch does not dispute that he used force against the students, although he disputes portions of the plaintiffs’ accounts of the incidents.

Koch moved for qualified immunity, contending that his. conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional rights. The district court denied the motion, concluding that students have a clearly established liberty interest in freedom from arbitrary corporal punishment. Koch appeals.

We affirm. The students had by 1990 a clearly established constitutional right to be free from the force allegedly used by Koch. No reasonable principal in 1990 could have thought it lawful to engage in the conduct plaintiffs allege.

I…

Concurring Opinion

Rymer, J.

concurring:

I concur in the judgment because there is little doubt that, by 1990,. the contours of a student’s right to be free from the violations of bodily integrity alleged in this ease were clearly established. The district court therefore correctly denied Koch’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that he was entitled to qualified immunity. Beyond that we cannot go, since the district court found (in resolving an earlier round of summary judgment motions) that there are genuine issues of material fact as to the need for corporal punishment, amount of force, extent of injury, and the reason for the force being applied to each of the students. Johnson v. Jones, - U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 2151 , 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995).

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.