Cruz

Cruz v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
229 F. App'x 431
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 14, 2007No. 04-57160California665 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiffs Fidel Cruz and Delza Cruz, who are operators of the Hotel Stuart, appeal from a summary judgment in favor of Defendant City of Los Angeles in their action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . On de novo review, Christie v. Iopa, 176 F.3d 1231, 1234 (9th Cir.1999), we affirm.

1. Plaintiffs cannot establish municipal liability under Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 , 98 S.Ct. 2018 , 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). See Gibson v. County of Washoe, 290 F.3d 1175, 1185 (9th Cir.2002) (setting forth the “two paths” to municipal liability). There is no “direct path to municipal liability” here, id., because there is no evidence of a policy, practice, or custom by the City of Los Angeles or a decision by a municipal policymaker concerning how to handle a tenant who has been illegally locked out of his room, see Monell, 436 U.S. at 690-91 , 98 S.Ct. 2018 (explaining that liability may be based on an unconstitutional policy, practice, or custom); Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469, 479-81 , 106 S.Ct. 1292 , 89 L.Ed.2d 452 (1986) (explaining that liability may be based on a single *432 decision by municipal policymakers under appropriate circumstances).…

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.