Skip to main content

United States Ninth Circuit


Acosta v. Hill, 05-56575

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action brought against security guards, police officers, and the city of San Diego, arising from plaintiff's arrest after she refused to leave Qualcomm stadium, a judgment pursuant to a jury finding for defendants is affirmed where the district court did not err in refusing to give a separate deadly force instruction. An earlier case's holding that an excessive force instruction based on the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness standard is not a substitute for a deadly force instruction is overruled pursuant to recent Supreme Court precedent.

Appellate Information

  • Argued 07/13/2007
  • Decided 10/17/2007
  • Published 10/17/2007

Judges

  • KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge:, Before:  ALEX KOZINSKI and RICHARD C. TALLMAN, Circuit Judges, and BRIAN E. SANDOVAL, District Judge.

Court

  • United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Meir J. Westreich, Pasadena, CA, for the plaintiff-appellant.

  • For Appellees:
  • Robert J. Walters, Deputy City Attorney;  Michael J. Aguirre, City Attorney, City of San Diego, San Diego, CA, for defendants-appellees City of San Diego, Gary Hill, Joseph Krouss and Eric Stafford., Matthew R. Rutherford, Law Offices of Matthew R. Rutherford, Lemon Grove, CA, for defendants-appellees Elite Show Services, Vladimir Atabekian and Donald Williams.
Copied to clipboard