Wills

Wills v. Denlinger

Good Law
11 F. App'x 931
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 29, 2001No. 99-17621; D.C. No. CV-98-00105-ACMCalifornia1,021 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiffs-appellants Constance Wills and Dennis Tomlinson appeal from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants in plaintiffs’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Plaintiffs are probation officers who were arrested because their attempt to visit a probationer coincided with the exact time and place of a controlled drug buy. They contend that the arrest violated their Fourth Amendment rights, and additionally raise several state law tort claims stemming from the arrest and subsequent detention. We affirm.

First, the district court properly dismissed as defendants the State of Arizona and its agency, the Department of Public Safety. Arizona did not expressly consent to federal jurisdiction in the context of this litigation, see Ashker v. California Dept. of Corrections, 112 F.3d 392 , 394 (9th Cir. 1997), and Arizona has not categorically waived its Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity by consenting to suit in its own state courts, see State of Montana v. Gilham, 133 F.3d 1133, 1138-39 (9th Cir. 1998); Ronwin v. Shapiro, 657 F.2d 1071, 1073-74 (9th Cir.1981).

The district court ruled that probable cause existed to arrest plaintiffs, and that in any…

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.