DUANE JENSEN V. LVMPD, No. 18-15590 (9th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED APR 16 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DUANE JENSEN, No. Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 18-15590 D.C. No. 2:14-cv-00029-RFB-VCF MEMORANDUM* LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Richard F. Boulware II, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 7, 2020** Before: TASHIMA, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Duane Jensen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment following a jury verdict in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his First Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm. Jensen waived his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). jury’s verdict by failing to move for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial before the district court. See Nitco Holding Corp. v. Boujikian, 491 F.3d 1086, 1089-90 (9th Cir. 2007) (to preserve a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, a party must file both a pre-verdict motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a) and a postverdict motion for judgment as a matter of law or new trial under Rule 50(b)). AFFIRMED. 2 18-15590

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.