Euralis Lord-Butcher Albert Ferdinand, Sr. Griselda Ferdinand, Karen Wendy Ferdinand Albert Dezi Ferdinand, Jr. Alison Ferdinand v. City of Newport Beach Walter Dejong Robert Henry, and Officer Breslin Officer Hamilton, Officer Heinecke Mark Everton, Euralis Lord-Butcher Albert Ferdinand, Sr. Griselda Ferdinand, Karen Wendy Ferdinand Albert Dezi Ferdinand, Jr. Alison Ferdinand, Plaintiffs-Appellees/cross-Appellants v. City of Newport Beach Officer Breslin Officer Hamilton, Officer Heinecke Mark Everton, Robert Henry Walter Dejong, Defendants-Appellants/cross-Appellees

Good Law
79 F.3d 1153·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 17205
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 199694-55929California3,809 words

Opinion

Opinion

79 F.3d 1153 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Euralis LORD-BUTCHER; Albert Ferdinand, Sr.; Griselda Ferdinand, Karen Wendy Ferdinand; Albert Dezi Ferdinand, Jr.; Alison Ferdinand, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH; Walter Dejong; Robert Henry, Defendants-Appellants, and Officer Breslin; Officer Hamilton, Officer Heinecke; Mark Everton, Defendants. Euralis LORD-BUTCHER; Albert Ferdinand, Sr.; Griselda Ferdinand, Karen Wendy Ferdinand; Albert Dezi Ferdinand, Jr.; Alison Ferdinand, Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants v. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH; Officer Breslin; Officer Hamilton, Officer Heinecke; Mark Everton, Robert Henry; Walter Dejong, Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees Nos. 94-55929, 94-55934. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 16, 1995. Decided March 13, 1996. 1 Before: NOONAN and HALL, Circuit Judges, and PRO, District Judge. * 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Defendant-appellants/Cross-appellees appeal the district…

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.