KEITH ARLINE, JR. V. R. GOWER, No. 15-15293 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED AUG 03 2016 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KEITH DUANE ARLINE, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 15-15293 D.C. No. 2:11-cv-03414-WBSKJN v. MEMORANDUM* R. GOWER; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 26, 2016** Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Keith Duane Arline, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights by depriving him of outdoor exercise. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendant Speers because Arline failed to raise a genuine dispute of fact as to whether Speers caused any constitutional violation. See Preschooler II v. Clark Cty. Sch. Bd. of Trs., 479 F.3d 1175, 1183 (9th Cir. 2007) (discussing causation under § 1983). The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants Gower, Davey, and Hitt on the basis of qualified immunity because it would not have been clear to every reasonable official that depriving Arline of outdoor exercise in response to a violent attack on a prison official was unconstitutional. See Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 735, 741 (2011) (explaining two-part test for qualified immunity); see also Norwood v. Vance, 591 F.3d 1062, 1068-70 (9th Cir. 2010) (discussing the application of qualified immunity where prisoners were deprived of outdoor exercise in response to prison violence). AFFIRMED. 2 15-15293
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
