Klein v. City of Beverly Hills, No. 15-56279 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe discovery rule applies to a judicial deception claim. If a diligent plaintiff has pursued the underlying affidavit without success, accrual need not begin at the time of the search. Plaintiff filed suit against defendants for investigating him in connection with his wife's death, claiming that the search warrants for his home and computer were obtained through judicial deception. The Ninth Circuit held there was no question that plaintiff diligently pursued the facts underlying his judicial deception claim. Therefore, his claim for judicial deception was timely. Accordingly, the panel affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Court Description: Civil Rights The panel affirmed in part, and reversed in part, the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the City of Beverly Hills, its police chief and others in Gary Klein’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, alleging that search warrants issued in connection with an investigation of Klein’s wife’s death were obtained through judicial deception. The panel held that the discovery rule applied to a judicial deception claim. The panel further held that Klein’s judicial deception claim as to the first search warrant in August 2009 began accruing when the underlying affidavit became reasonably available. The panel concluded that because Klein acted with diligence, his claim for judicial deception arising from the August 2009 search was timely. In a concurrently field memorandum disposition, the panel affirmed the district court’s decision that Klein’s judicial deception claim failed on the merits.
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.