Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)

Citation: Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)
Parent Document: Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2018-05-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4502306/heriberto-rodriguez-v-county-of... ↗

Full Text

1,001 chars

Here, during the pendency of the qualified immunity
appeal, we issued a show cause order inviting appellants to
identify the issues, if any, over which we had jurisdiction.
Appellants’ response failed to identify issues over which we
would have had jurisdiction. Instead, appellants either relied
on disputed facts or made conclusory assertions insufficient
to show that they had a colorable claim to qualified immunity
even if all inferences were drawn in appellees’ favor. For
example, appellants Blasnek and Cruz argued that they “did
not participate in any of Plaintiffs’ cell extractions and played
no part in the manner in which their extractions were carried
out.” (Emphasis added.) Appellees, however, presented
evidence (and ultimately proved) that Cruz and Blasnek did
play a part in the manner in which the extractions were
carried out, both by directly observing the extractions and
choosing not to intervene and by creating a jail culture in
which uses of excessive force went unpunished.

Other Sections in This Document (185)

Full Text