Reed v. Lieurance, No. 15-35018 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed suit alleging that Deputy Doug Lieurance's issuance of a misdemeanor citation to plaintiff for obstructing a buffalo herding operation violated plaintiff's constitutional rights. The Ninth Circuit held that defendants were not entitled to summary judgment on the unlawful seizure claim because the panel could not conclude as a matter of law that a reasonably prudent officer in the deputy's situation would have had probable cause to believe plaintiff committed obstruction and the district court improperly weighed evidence favorable to plaintiff against other evidence presented, failing to draw all inferences in plaintiff's favor; the district court did not first provide plaintiff notice and an opportunity to respond before dismissing the failure-to-train claim for failure to satisfy Rule 12(b)(6); the district court abused its discretion by excluding the entirety of plaintiff's police practices expert's testimony; the district court committed reversible procedural error in granting judgment as a matter of law on plaintiff's First Amendment and related state claims without first providing him notice of the grounds for the decision; the district court improperly resolved numerous factual disputes reserved for the jury; and the panel lacked jurisdiction to review the district court's denial without prejudice of defendants' attorney fees motion. Accordingly, the court dismissed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
Court Description: Civil Rights. The panel reversed the district court’s summary judgment, the district court’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) dismissals, and its judgment as a matter of law, and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction an appeal from the district court’s order denying defendants’ motion for attorney fees, in an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law. Plaintiff Anthony Reed alleged that his constitutional rights were violated when he was arrested and cited while volunteering to observe an interagency government operation to herd buffalo into Yellowstone National Park. Construing the facts in Reed’s favor, the panel could not conclude that as a matter of law, a reasonably prudent officer in defendant Deputy Lieurance’s situation would have had probable cause to believe that Reed obstructed the herding operation. The panel determined that the district court REED V. LIEURANCE 3 improperly invaded the province of the jury when it resolved factual disputes material to the question of probable cause. Thus, defendants were not entitled to summary judgment on Reed’s unlawful seizure claim. The panel reversed the district court’s sua sponte dismissal, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), of Reed’s failure-to-train claim on the grounds that the district court did not first provide Reed with notice and an opportunity to respond before dismissing the claim. The panel further held that the district court abused its discretion by excluding the testimony of Reed’s police practices expert as it related to the failure-to-train claim. The panel held that the district court committed reversible error in granting judgment as a matter of law on Reed’s First Amendment and related state claims without first providing Reed notice of the grounds for the decision. Addressing the merits of the First Amendment claim, the panel held that in ruling that defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the district court improperly resolved numerous factual disputes reserved for the jury. The panel determined that it lacked jurisdiction to review the district court’s denial without prejudice of defendants’ motion for attorney fees and therefore dismissed defendants’ cross-appeal from that order. On remand, the panel ordered that the case be reassigned to a different district judge. 4 REED V. LIEURANCE
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.