Moore

Moore v. Glickman

Good Law
113 F.3d 988·97 Daily Journal DAR 5849·1997 WL 226197·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 10090·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3379
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 7, 1997No. 95-17435California3,436 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Barbara Moore appeals the district court’s summary judgment in favor of defendants in her Bivens action alleging violations of her federal constitutional rights. We review de novo, Saul v. United States, 928 F.2d 829, 832 (9th Cir.1991), and we affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Barbara Moore filed this action against the Secretary of Agriculture, eight officials of the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (“ASCS”), and four officials of the Agriculture Department’s Office of Inspector General (“OIG”), for alleged constitutional violations arising out of the investigation of illegal conduct at the ASCS office where Moore worked, and her removal from her job. Her claims against these federal agents were brought directly under the Constitution. Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 , 91 S.Ct. 1999 , 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971).

Moore was the Chief Program Assistant at the ASCS office in Kern County, California. The ASCS was established pursuant to the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, Pub.L. No. 46, 49 Stat. 163 (1935). To *990 day, it is part of the Consolidated Farm Service Agency. 1 Under 16 U.S.C. § 590h (1988)…

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.