Zeltser

Tamara Zeltser, d/b/a Medallion Jewelry & Loan (“Zeltser”), appeals the district *1143 court’s order granting summary judgment to the City of Oakland (“City”) in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court held as a matter of law that the City did not violate Zeltser’s right to due process when it failed to provide her with notice and an opportunity to be heard before returning a ring seized from her pawnshop to its original owner. The district court held that because the ring was seized pursuant to a warrant under CaLPenal Code § 1536, no further notice and hearing was required. We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, Pad-field v. AIG Life Ins. Co., 290 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2002), and we reverse.

Zeltser raises a number of issues on appeal. In this opinion, we deal only with her argument that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the City regarding the Oakland Police Department’s (“OPD”) liability for the seizure and return of the ring. We address Zeltser’s arguments concerning other pawned items seized from her pawnshop in a companion unpublished disposition.

I

In December 1992, Willie Packnett reported the theft…