Cooper v. Dupnik, s. 88-15661
Decision Date | 23 May 1991 |
Docket Number | 88-15685,Nos. 88-15661,s. 88-15661 |
Citation | 933 F.2d 798 |
Parties | Michael COOPER, husband, in his own capacity and as parent of Abram and Adam Cooper, minors; Lidia Cooper, wife, in her own capacity and as parent of Abram Cooper and Adam Cooper, minors, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Clarence DUPNIK, Sheriff, Pima County; Tom Taylor, an employee of Pima County Sheriff's Department; Weaver Barkman, an employee of Pima County Sheriff's Department, Defendants-Appellants. Michael COOPER, husband, in his own capacity and as parent of Abram and Adam Cooper, minors; Lidia Cooper, wife, in her own capacity and as parent of Abram Cooper and Adam Cooper, minors, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Clarence DUPNIK, Sheriff, Pima County, Defendant, and City of Tucson; Tucson Police Department; Peter Ronstadt; Karen Wright; Gene Scott; Timothy O'Sullivan; Kay McCall, Defendants-Appellants. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona; Richard M. Bilby, Chief Judge.
Michael P. Callahan, Deputy County Atty., Tucson, Ariz., for defendants-appellants Clarence Dupnik and Tom Taylor.
David L. Berkman, Murphy, Goering, Roberts & Holt, Tucson, Ariz., for defendant-appellant Weaver Barkman.
David F. Toone, Kimble, Gothreau & Nelson, Tucson, Ariz., for defendant-appellant Peter Ronstadt.
Stephen M. Weiss, Karp, Stoklin & Weiss, Winton D. Woods, Michael J. Bloom, Tucson, Ariz., for plaintiffs-appellees.
Prior report: 9th Cir., 924 F.2d 1520.
Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, BROWNING, HUG, TANG, SCHROEDER, FLETCHER, FARRIS, PREGERSON, ALARCON, POOLE, D.W. NELSON, CANBY, NORRIS, REINHARDT, BEEZER, HALL, WIGGINS, BRUNETTI, KOZINSKI, NOONAN, THOMPSON, O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, TROTT, FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and THOMAS G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
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.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cooper v. Dupnik
...the defamation claim. Cooper v. Dupnik, 924 F.2d 1520 (9th Cir.1991). Cooper successfully petitioned for a rehearing en banc. 933 F.2d 798 (9th Cir.1991). The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (1988). We have jurisdiction of this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 12......
- U.S. v. Awadallah
- Gersten v. Rundle, 93-1229-CIV.
-
Gonzalez v. Tilmer
...blood-alcohol content was a seizure incident to arrest. In Cooper v. Dupnik, 924 F.2d 1520 (9th Cir.), rehearing en banc granted, 933 F.2d 798 (9th Cir.1991), however, the court applied a substantive due process analysis to a claim that police used coercion in an unsuccessful attempt to eli......
-
Perjury
...F.3d 1072, 1079 (2d Cir. 1997) (holding a legitimate basis for investigation precludes application of the perjury trap doctrine); Chen , 933 F.2d at 798 (holding the possibility that the government anticipated the defendant would give false testimony before a grand jury was insufficient to......