J. J. v. City of San Diego

121 F.4th 1354

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: November 27, 2024
• Docket: 20-55622
• Status: Published

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

J. K. J., individually, and successor in No. 20-55622 interest to the Deceased Aleah Jenkins, by and through his guardian-ad-litem D.C. No. Jeremy Hillyer, 3:19-cv-02123- CAB-RBB Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. ORDER

CITY OF SAN DIEGO, a public entity; DAVID NISLET, in his individual capacity and official capacity as Police Chief of the San Diego Police Department; LAWRENCE DURBIN, an individual; JASON TAUB, an individual; DOES, 1-10, Inclusive,

Defendants-Appellees,

and

NICHOLAS CASICOLA,

Defendant. 2 J.K.J. V. CITY OF SAN DIEGO

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Cathy Ann Bencivengo, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted En Banc June 21, 2023 Submission Vacated February 1, 2024 Resubmitted November 21, 2024 Seattle, Washington

Filed November 27, 2024

Before: Mary H. Murguia, Chief Judge, and Morgan Christen, Michelle T. Friedland, Mark J. Bennett, Eric D. Miller, Bridget S. Bade, Kenneth K. Lee, Patrick J. Bumatay, Lawrence VanDyke, Jennifer Sung and Roopali H. Desai, Circuit Judges.

COUNSEL

Megha Ram (argued) and Devi Rao, Roderick & Solange MacArthur Justice Center, Washington, D.C.; Kaveh Navab I, Navab Law APC, Marina Del Rey, California; H. Dean Aynechi and Neama Rahmani, West Coast Trial Lawyers, Los Angeles, California; for Plaintiff-Appellant. James C. Jardin (argued), Collins and Collins LLP, Orange, California; Christie B. Swiss, Collins and Collins LLP, Carlsbad, California; Seetal Tejura, Chief Deputy City Attorney; George F. Schaefer, Assistant City Attorney; Mara W. Elliot, City Attorney; Office of the City Attorney, San Diego, California; for Defendants-Appellees. J.K.J. V. CITY OF SAN DIEGO 3

Jay R. Schweikert and Clark M. Neily III, Cato Institute, Washington D.C., for Amicus Curiae Cato Institute.

ORDER

The parties’ joint motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED. Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal. This order constitutes the mandate of this court.