Duvall

Duvall v. Walters

Good Law
35 F. App'x 585
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 22, 2002No. 00-35951, 01-35003; D.C. No. CV-99-01863-RSLCalifornia423 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Jeffrey Duvall, a police officer in Mukilteo, claims that his civil rights were violated by the disciplinary actions of police superiors, and the inaction of various other officials. The district court granted summary judgment on the merits of the claims, but did not grant the defendants’ motion for attorneys’ fees. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Duvall cannot sustain a claim against the city, or against the mayor and the city administrator in their supervisory capacity, because he has failed to adduce evidence to satisfy the requirements of Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 , 98 S.Ct. 2018 , 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). See Hopper v. City of Pasco, 241 F.3d 1067, 1083 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 346 , 151 L.Ed.2d 261 (2001).

With respect to his constitutional claims, Duvall has failed to establish that the defendants’ conduct violated a constitutional right. The absence of evidence in his multiple claims is detailed in the district court’s order. 1 As a consequence, Duvall cannot overcome the first step of Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001).

Duvall has similarly…

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.