United States Ninth Circuit

Plaintiff alleged selective and over-zealous regulatory oversight by defendants in violation of equal protection and substantive due process laws, and the Court reversed summary judgment only on the equal protection claim, finding that plaintiff's presentation of evidence that defendant may have been motivated by personal animus was enough to provide a factual dispute.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/20/2004
• Published 07/20/2004

Judges

• Before: TASHIMA and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges, and LEIGHTON, District Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• G. David Robertson, Robertson & Benevento, Reno, NV, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Janill L. Richards, Office of the California Attorney General, Oakland, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.