Rogers v. Clark County School District

Good Law
52 F. App'x 911
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 9, 2002No. 01-17137; D.C. No. CV-00-01159-RLH/PALCalifornia484 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Edward Goldman appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss Rogers’ civil rights claims. We have interlocutory appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 to consider the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. Jensen v. City of Oxnard, 145 F.3d 1078, 1082 (9th Cir.1998). Although the district court treated the motion as a reiteration of the earlier motion to dismiss on Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds, we find that Goldman is not entitled to qualified immunity based on the record before us.

We review the district court’s qualified immunity determination de novo. Jensen, 145 F.3d at 1082 . We assume the truth of all material allegations in the complaint and construe them in the light most favorable to Rogers. Id. A dismissal is warranted only if it appears beyond doubt that Rogers can prove no set of facts in support of his claims that would entitle him to relief. Id.

Goldman argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate Rogers’ clearly established constitutional rights. To find qualified. immunity, we first determine whether the alleged facts considered in the light most favorable to Rogers, show…

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.