From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

C.B. v. City of Sonora

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Feb 3, 2014
755 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 11–17454.

2014-02-3

C. B., a minor, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. CITY OF SONORA; Mace Mcintosh, Chief of Police; HAL PROCK, Officer, Defendants–Appellants.

John F. Martin, Esquire, Georgelle Christina Heintel, Esquire, Law Office of John F. Martin, Walnut Creek, CA, for Plaintiff–Appellee. Cornelius J. Callahan, Stephanie Y. Wu, Borton Petrini LLP, Modesto, CA, for Defendants–Appellants.


John F. Martin, Esquire, Georgelle Christina Heintel, Esquire, Law Office of John F. Martin, Walnut Creek, CA, for Plaintiff–Appellee. Cornelius J. Callahan, Stephanie Y. Wu, Borton Petrini LLP, Modesto, CA, for Defendants–Appellants.

ORDER


KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35–3. The three judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.


Summaries of

C.B. v. City of Sonora

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Feb 3, 2014
755 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

C.B. v. City of Sonora

Case Details

Full title:C. B., a minor, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CITY OF SONORA; MACE MCINTOSH…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Feb 3, 2014

Citations

755 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

C.S. v. Platte Canyon Sch. Dist. No.1

weight of authority" indicates that the Fourteenth Amendment is the only one that applies); Holloman v.…

C.B. v. City of Sonora

In a split decision, a majority of the panel also held that the individual officers were entitled to…