Young

Young v. Seling

Good Law
72 F. App'x 657
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 11, 2003No. 01-35697; D.C. No. CV-98-05351-RJBCalifornia1,178 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Andre Young filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 arguing a violation of his constitutional rights. Specifically, Young contends that the Special Commitment Center (“SCC”) violated his constitutional rights by monitoring his telephone calls and for denying his incoming and outgoing telephone calls from April 18 through September 24,1998, when Young’s sister was terminally ill.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we REVERSE the district court’s order granting summary judgment for the defendants. Further, we hold that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

I.

Summary Judgment

We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 626 (9th Cir.2002). We must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the relative substantive law. Id.

In granting summary judgment for the defendants, the district court focuses primarily on the November 1998 Order, issued by Judge Dwyer. However, the telephone issue raised in this appeal was clearly…

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.