Webb v. Sloan
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
330 F.3d 1158 (2003)
- Written by Jack Newell, JD
Facts
Deputy Darrin Sloan (defendant) of Carson City, Nevada (defendant) was in pursuit of a suspect in a vehicle chase. The suspect got out of his own car and fled. Sloan pursued on foot, eventually losing track of the suspect. Another deputy located a man, David Webb (plaintiff), lying down behind a car in a nearby parking lot. Sloan thought Webb was the suspect. However, Sloan observed that Webb’s clothes were different from the suspect’s clothes. Webb was arrested and taken into custody. Later, Sloan told Melanie Bruketta, the district attorney, that he did not believe Webb was the suspect he had originally been chasing. Bruketta charged Webb with multiple traffic offenses and obstructing police officers. Deputy District Attorney Ray Oster offered to drop the traffic charges if Webb pleaded guilty to the obstruction charge. Webb refused. The traffic charges were soon dropped anyway. The case was transferred to Chief Deputy District Attorney Anne Langer, who offered to drop the obstruction charge if Webb would sign a waiver of civil liability. Webb refused this offer as well. Webb was acquitted of the obstruction charge at trial. Webb then sued Carson City for violation of his civil rights in federal district court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Carson City argued that it could not be held liable for the actions of a district attorney. A jury found that Carson City was liable and awarded Webb $80,000. Carson City appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Graber, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.