Morrow

Morrow v. City of Oakland

Good Law
200 F. App'x 644
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 28, 2006Nos. 05-15499, 05-17047, 05-17061California445 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

In these three pro se appeals, Oakland police officer Frank Morrow, Jr. appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing, pursuant to settlement, Griselvia Castaneda’s civil rights action against Morrow and the City of Oakland (“City”), and Morrow’s own civil rights actions arising from the handling of Castaneda’s complaint. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s interpretation of a settlement agreement, “with due respect for the district court’s superior perspective.” Congregation ETZ Chaim v. City of Los Angeles, 371 F.3d 1122, 1124 (9th Cir.2004). We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s decision to enforce a settlement agreement. Doi v. Halekulani Corp., 276 F.3d 1131, 1136 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.

The district court properly enforced the March 31, 2004 settlement agreement between Castaneda and Morrow and the City (“the Castaneda settlement”) because Morrow, assisted by counsel of his own choosing, acknowledged and accepted the key terms of the agreement before the settlement judge. See Doi, 276 F.3d at 1137-39 . For the same reasons, the district court properly enforced the April 20, 2004…

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.