Tubar

Tubar v. Clift

Good Law
286 F. App'x 348
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 11, 2008No. 06-35836California1,395 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant-Appellants Jason Clift, a police officer for the City of Kent, and the City of Kent appeal the district court’s denial of their motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of Officer Clift’s affirmative defense of qualified immunity in Appellee Nicomedes Tubar’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we do not recount them here. We review de novo an appeal from an order denying a motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity, and we affirm in part and dismiss in part. Kennedy v. City of Ridgefield, 439 F.3d 1055, 1059 (9th Cir.2006).

I. Jurisdiction

As an initial matter, we address Tubar’s renewed motion to dismiss this interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction. A district court’s rejection of an individual defendant’s defense of qualified immunity, insofar as it rests on a question of law, is immediately appealable as a collateral order. See Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 306 , 116 S.Ct. 834 , 133 L.Ed.2d 773 (1996). In denying Clift’s motion for summary judgment, however, the district court noted that there were disputed issues of fact, which generally deprives us of…

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.