Joseph Horne v. J. Rutledge

398 F. App'x 264
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedOctober 4, 2010
Docket09-17378
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 398 F. App'x 264 (Joseph Horne v. J. Rutledge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Joseph Horne v. J. Rutledge, 398 F. App'x 264 (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The district court properly granted summary judgment on the excessive force *265 claim because Joseph Deonn Horne (“Horne”) failed to raise a triable issue as to whether prison guards acted “maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm” by using pepper spray after Horne repeatedly refused to comply with orders to cease holding his blanket up to the cell door. Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 6, 112 S.Ct. 995, 117 L.Ed.2d 156 (1992) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

Horne’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

(PC) Savary v. Towle
E.D. California, 2020

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
398 F. App'x 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-horne-v-j-rutledge-ca9-2010.