Tarr

MEMORANDUM *

Nick Tarr appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Maricopa County on Tarr’s claims that certain officers of the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office violated his constitutional rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The magistrate judge’s decision was based on his conclusion that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity. Tarr also appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for leave to amend the complaint to include Sheriff Joe Arpaio as a defendant and to request punitive damages. We reverse the grant of summary judgment and, because the opinion below is vacated by our reversal, we conclude that we need not decide whether the denial of leave to amend was an abuse of discretion.

A district court’s grant of summary judgement is reviewed de novo, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. E.g., Scribner v. Worldcom, Inc., 249 F.3d 902, 907 (9th Cir.2001). Whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity is determined via a two-part inquiry. See Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001); see also Peng v. Mei Chin *73 Penghu, 335 F.3d 970, 976 (9th…

concurring:

I concur in the result.