Gibson v. City of Seattle Department of Police, 26553.
| Citation | 472 F.2d 1220 |
| Decision Date | 19 January 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 26553.,26553. |
| Parties | Norman Allen GIBSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SEATTLE (WASHINGTON), DEPARTMENT OF POLICE et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
Norman Allen Gibson, in pro. per.
A. L. Newbould, Charles R. Nelson, Seattle, Wash., for defendants-appellees.
Before ELY and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges, and FERGUSON,* District Judge.
We affirm in part and reverse in part a judgment dismissing an action brought pursuant to the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S. C. § 1983.
The action alleges that the defendants seized and confiscated certain items of plaintiff's personal property without cause but under color of state law. The district court dismissed the action as to all defendants.
The dismissal of the City of Seattle is affirmed, as that municipal defendant is not a "person" under the Civil Rights Act. Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 81 S.Ct. 473, 5 L.Ed.2d 492 (1961).
With regard to the individual defendants, the district court held that the Act did not apply to property rights and that therefore it lacked jurisdiction. Subsequent to that determination, the Supreme Court in Lynch v. Household Finance Corp., 405 U.S. 538, 92 S.Ct. 1113, 31 L.Ed.2d 424 (1972), held that property rights as well as personal liberties are within the protection of the Civil Rights Act.
The district court dismissed the action relative to the individual defendants for the additional reason that the plaintiff had a state cause of action for common law conversion. The denial of federal jurisdiction upon that ground was rejected in Monroe v. Pape, supra.
The judgment with regard to the City of Seattle is affirmed. It is reversed with regard to the individual defendants.
* Honorable Warren J. Ferguson, United States District Judge, Central District of California, sitting by designation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v. City of Seattle
...off. Property rights, in addition to personal liberties, are within the protection of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Gibson v. Seattle (Wash.) Dep't of Police, 472 F.2d 1220 (9th Cir.1973). What must be proved by a section 1983 plaintiff may involve more than is necessary for establishing a right to rel......
-
Bonner v. Coughlin
...Russell v. Bodner, 489 F.2d 280 (3rd Cir. 1973); Cruz v. Cardwell, 486 F.2d 550 (8th Cir. 1973); Gibson v. City of Seattle (Washington) Dept. of Police, 472 F.2d 1220 (9th Cir. 1973). 18 Amended Complaint paragraph 14. 19 Whirl v. Kern, 407 F.2d 781, 790 (5th Cir. 1968). 20 Gutierrez v. Dep......
-
6th Camden Corp. v. Evesham Tp., Burlington Cty.
...503 F.2d 607, 611 n. 8 (6th Cir. 1974); Flood v. Margis, 461 F.2d 253, 255 (7th Cir. 1972); Gibson v. City of Seattle Police Department, 472 F.2d 1220, 1221 (9th Cir. 1973) (per curiam); Rios v. Cessna Finance Corp., 488 F.2d 25, 28 (10th Cir. 1973). The cases cited by the defendants for th......
-
Hofferber v. First Nat. Bank of Guymon, Oklahoma
...538, 92 S.Ct. 1113, 31 L.Ed.2d 424 (1972); Rios v. Cessna Finance Corp., 488 F.2d 25 (Tenth Cir. 1973); Gibson v. City of Seattle Department of Police, 472 F.2d 1220 (Ninth Cir. 1973); Koger v. Guarino, 412 F.Supp. 1375 (E.D.Pa.1976). Therefore, Defendants' argument that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 de......