Muzquiz

Muzquiz v. Clackamas County

Good Law
165 F. App'x 503
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 6, 2006No. 04-35787California511 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

ORDER

The petition for. panel rehearing is GRANTED. The memorandum disposition filed on November 30, 2005, is amended. The amended memorandum disposition will be filed concurrently with this order. No further petitions for rehearing or for rehearing en banc may be filed.

AMENDED MEMORANDUM ***

Plaintiff Gloria Muzquiz sued her former employer, alleging (among other things) a violation of her right to equal protection, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . The district court denied a motion for summary judgment by Defendants Newton and Fischer-Davidson on that claim. They bring this interlocutory appeal, arguing entitlement to qualified immunity. On de novo review, Jeffers v. Gomez, 267 F.3d 895, 905-06 (9th Cir.2001) (per curiam), we affirm in part and reverse in part.

1. Defendants’ main legal argument is that their motive is not relevant as *505 a matter of law. Where the underlying alleged constitutional violation has an intent element, however, deciding whether the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity necessarily involves inquiring into mental state. Id. at 911 . The Fourth Amendment cases cited by Defendants are not germane. Rather, here, to prevail Plaintiff must show intentional…

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.