ALVAREZ v. Adam R. Buchan, in his individual capacity; et al., Defendants-Appellees. (2019)
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Moises E. Ponce ALVAREZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KING COUNTY, a municipal corporation, Defendant, Adam R. Buchan, in his individual capacity; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Decided: December 13, 2019
Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Moises E. Ponce Alvarez, Pro Se John R. Zeldenrust, King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, Seattle, WA, for Defendants-Appellees
Moises E. Ponce Alvarez appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) motion for a new trial following a jury verdict for defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Kode v. Carlson, 596 F.3d 608, 611 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Alvarez's motion for a new trial because there was evidence to support the jury's verdict that defendants’ use of force was reasonable and not excessive. See Kingsley v. Hendrickson, ––– U.S. ––––, 135 S. Ct. 2466, 2473, 192 L.Ed.2d 416 (2015) (describing considerations for evaluating whether use of force was reasonable); see also Kode, 596 F.3d at 612 (“[W]here the basis of a Rule 59 ruling is that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence, the district court's denial of a Rule 59 motion is virtually unassailable. In such cases, we reverse for a clear abuse of discretion only where there is an absolute absence of evidence to support the jury's verdict.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.