Henderson v. City of Seattle

Good Law
71 F. App'x 631
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 23, 2003No. 02-35768; DC No. CV 01-1199 MJPCalifornia625 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant Keith Swank, a Seattle police officer, appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Plaintiff Zenash Hadera alleges that Swank violated her Fourth Amendment rights when he arrested her for Obstructing a Public Officer under Seattle Municipal Code (SMC) 12A16.010, without cause.

Pursuant to the collateral order doctrine, we have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). We review de novo, Sorrels v. McKee, 290 F.3d 965, 969 (9th Cir.2002), and may affirm on any ground supported by the record, see Schnabel v. Lui, 302 F.3d 1023, 1036 (9th Cir.2002); DP Aviation v. Smiths Indus. Aerospace & Def. Sys. Ltd., 268 F.3d 829 , 846 n. 15 (9th Cir.2001). We affirm, but on a different ground than that relied on by the district court.

Our jurisdiction in a qualified immunity interlocutory appeal is “generally limited to questions of law, and does not extend to *632 claims resting on the determination of disputed issues of material fact.” Jeffers v. Gomez, 267 F.3d 895, 903 (9th Cir.2001). “Where…

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.