Jacqueline Lawrence, et al v. LVMPD, et al
| BRIAN MONTANA, UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| KEITH CHILDRESS, Sr., Individually and as Successor in interest to Keith Childress, Jr., deceased, AMBER NEUBERT, guardian ad litem on behalf of K.C., JACQUELINE LAWRENCE, CAROLINA NAVARRO, guardian ad litem on behalf of K.C., ARACELI SAENZ, guardian ad litem on behalf of A.S. and FREDERICK WAID, as special administrator of the Estate of Keith Childress, Jr. |
| BLAKE WALFORD, JAMES LEDOGAR, LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT and ROBERT BOHANON |
| 20-15794 |
| April 27, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 24, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Filed order (SUSAN P. GRABER, KIM MCLANE WARDLAW and RYAN D. NELSON) The court has received and reviewed the parties responses to the courts May 5, 2020 order to show cause as to why: (1) appeal No. 20-15669 should not be dismissed as to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) for lack of jurisdiction; and (2) appeal No. 20-15794 should not be dismissed in its entirety for lack of jurisdiction. Our review of the record and the parties responses to the order to show cause confirms that this court lacks jurisdiction over LVMPDs appeal in No. 20-15669, which challenges the district courts denial of summary judgment and immunity to LVMPD on plaintiffs state law claims. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Liberal v. Estrada, 632 F.3d 1064, 1074 (9th Cir. 2011) (district courts ordinary denial of summary judgment on state law claims, as opposed to denial of immunity, is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. 1291); Cousins v. Lockyer, 568 F.3d 1063, 1072 (9th Cir. 2009) ([Q]ualified immunity is a doctrine of federal common law and, as such, has no application to [plaintiffs] state claims, which are subject only to state statutory immunities.) (emphasis in original). We further conclude that this court lacks jurisdiction over appeal No. 20-15794, in which plaintiffs-appellants challenge the district courts grants of qualified immunity and summary judgment to defendants as to certain of plaintiffs claims, because the challenged order is not final. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Chacon v. Babcock, 640 F.2d 221, 222 (9th Cir. 1981) (order is not appealable unless it disposes of all claims as to all parties or judgment is entered in compliance with rule). Neither LVMPDs appeal nor the plaintiffs-appellants appeal presents issues over which this court may properly exercise pendent jurisdiction. See Cunningham v. Gates, 229 F.3d 1271 (9th Cir. 2000) (stating standard). Accordingly, appeal No. 20-15669 is dismissed as to appellant Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. Appeal No. 20-15794 is dismissed in full for lack of jurisdiction. Briefing in appeal No. 20-15669 shall proceed as follows: the opening brief and excerpts of record are due August 24, 2020; the answering brief is due September 23, 2020; and the optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11732434] (JBS) [Entered: 06/24/2020 02:03 PM] |
| Filing 7 Filed (ECF) Appellants Keith Childress, Sr., Jacqueline Lawrence, Carolina Navarro, Amber Neubert, Araceli Saenz and Frederick Waid in 20-15794 response to order to show cause dated 05/05/2020. Date of service: 05/26/2020. [11701448] [20-15794, 20-15669] (Galipo, Dale) [Entered: 05/26/2020 04:30 PM] |
| Filing 6 Filed (ECF) Appellants Robert Bohanon, James Ledogar, LVMPD and Blake Walford in 20-15669, Appellees Robert Bohanon, James Ledogar, LVMPD and Blake Walford in 20-15794 response to order to show cause dated 05/05/2020. Date of service: 05/08/2020. [11684531] [20-15669, 20-15794] (Anderson, Craig) [Entered: 05/08/2020 08:51 AM] |
| Filing 5 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: LCC): These cross-appeals challenge the district courts April 1, 2020 order granting in part and denying in part the motion for summary judgment filed by appellants Bohanon, Walford, Ledogar, and the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD). A review of the record suggests that this court may lack jurisdiction over the appeal filed by LVMPD. The denial of summary judgment to a municipal defendant on a Monell claim is . . . no different from the denial of any ordinary motion for summary judgment, and so is not immediately appealable. Horton by Horton v. City of Santa Maria, 915 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2019); see also Dougherty v. City of Covina, 654 F.3d 892, 900 (9th Cir. 2011) (Qualified immunity does not shield municipalities from liability.). Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant LVMPD shall move for voluntary dismissal of its appeal or show cause why appeal No. 20-15669 should not be dismissed as to LVMPD for lack of jurisdiction. A review of the record further suggests that this court may lack jurisdiction over appeal No. 20-15794 in its entirety. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Chacon v. Babcock, 640 F.2d 221, 222 (9th Cir. 1981) (order is not appealable unless it disposes of all claims as to all parties or judgment is entered in compliance with rule); cf. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530 (1985) (orders denying qualified immunity are generally immediately appealable); Rodis v. City, Cty. of San Francisco, 558 F.3d 964, 968 (9th Cir. 2009). Within 21 days after the date of this order, cross-appellants shall move for voluntary dismissal of appeal No. 20-15794 or show cause why it should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. If any party elects to show cause, a response may be filed within 10 days after service of the memorandum. If appellant LVMPD or cross-appellants do not comply with this order, the Clerk shall dismiss the parties respective appeals pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1. Briefing in these cross-appeals is suspended pending further order of the court. [11681543] [20-15669, 20-15794] (JBS) [Entered: 05/05/2020 04:02 PM] |
| Filing 4 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: These cases are RELEASED from the Mediation Program. [11680709] [20-15669, 20-15794] (VS) [Entered: 05/05/2020 10:04 AM] |
| Filing 3 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 05/04/2020. To submit pertinent confidential information directly to the Circuit Mediators, please use the following # link . Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts.[11680306]. [20-15794] (AD) [Entered: 05/04/2020 06:44 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Appellants Keith Childress, Sr., Jacqueline Lawrence, Carolina Navarro, Amber Neubert and Araceli Saenz in 20-15794 Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 05/04/2020. [11680022] [20-15794, 20-15669] (Galipo, Dale) [Entered: 05/04/2020 03:56 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. Setting cross-appeal briefing schedule as follows: Appellants Keith Childress Sr., Jacqueline Lawrence, Carolina Navarro, Amber Neubert, Araceli Saenz and Frederick Waid Mediation Questionnaire due on 05/04/2020. First cross appeal brief due 07/23/2020 for Robert Bohanon, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, James Ledogar and Blake Walford. Second brief on cross appeal due 08/24/2020 for Keith Childress Sr., Jacqueline Lawrence, Carolina Navarro, Amber Neubert, Araceli Saenz and Frederick Waid. Third brief on cross appeal due 09/23/2020 for Robert Bohanon, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, James Ledogar and Blake Walford. Optional cross appeal reply brief is due within 21 days of service of third brief on cross appeal. [11672511] [20-15794, 20-15669] (JBS) [Entered: 04/27/2020 11:52 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
