Rupert v. City of Scotts Valley

Good Law
87 F.3d 1321·1996 WL 329382·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31481
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 14, 199695-15848California940 words

Opinion

Opinion

87 F.3d 1321 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William RUPERT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY, a Municipal Corporation; Scotts Valley City Police Department; Steve Walpole, Scotts Valley City Police Chief; P.O. Bidleman; P.O. Brzozowski; P.O. Guy Collins, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-15848. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 11, 1996. * Decided June 14, 1996. Before: CANBY, JOHN T. NOONAN, JR., and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 William Rupert appeals pro se from the judgment against him following a jury verdict in his civil rights action against the City of Scotts Valley, Police Chief Steve Walpole, Sergeant Bidleman, Police Officer Brzozowski, and Police Officer Collins. Rupert contends the magistrate judge erred by (1) expanding the scope of the trial beyond the issues identified at the pretrial conference; (2) erroneously instructing the jury regarding the burden of proof and the issue of consent; (3)…

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.