Olagues

Olagues v. Kousharian

Good Law
177 F. App'x 537
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 10, 2006No. 05-15114California476 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

*538 John Olagues appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that appellees violated his constitutional rights, during the course of an international child custody dispute. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Bateson v. Geisse, 857 F.2d 1300, 1305 (9th Cir.1988), and affirm.

Olagues alleged his procedural due process rights were violated when officials removed his children from his custody in Louisiana on July 23, 2003. The district court properly dismissed this claim because the New Zealand and California court orders demonstrated that Olagues had a protected interest in maintaining physical custody of his children only within California between July 2 and 18, 2003. See id.

Olagues alleged he was falsely arrested and imprisoned by appellees Leon Kousharian, Otis Bruce, Christopher Pool, and Patricia Stafford, in connection with a “failed extradition attempt.” The district court properly concluded that these appellees were entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that they reasonably believed there was probable cause for Olagues’ arrest. See Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 ,…

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.