Smith v. City of Hemet

371 F.3d 1045, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 11319
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Smith v. City of Hemet. Read the opinion of the Court — 394 F.3d 689
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided June 9, 2004·No. 02-56445·Published

Opinion

371 F.3d 1045

Thomas SMITH, Plaintiff — Appellant,
v.
CITY OF HEMET, a municipal corporation; Hemet Police Department; Lee Evanson; Dave Quinn; Aaron Medina; Reinbolt; Trainer; Nate Miller; Peter Hewitt, Defendants — Appellees.

No. 02-56445.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

June 9, 2004.

Donald W. Cook, Esq., Robert Mann, Esq., Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Elizabeth Feffer, Burke Williams & Sorensen, LLP., Los Angeles, CA, Aaron C. Harp, Esq., Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP., Irvine, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

ORDER

SCHROEDER, Chief Judge.

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court.

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

Smith v. City of Hemet, 371 F.3d 1045, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 11319 (9th Cir. 2004).

371 F.3d 1045 (Smith v. City of Hemet) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.