R. W. V. COLUMBIA BASIN COLLEGE, ET AL, No. 21-35995 (9th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Columbia Basin College officials terminated R.W. from the nursing program after learning that he had sought medical treatment for homicidal thoughts about three instructors. R.W. filed suit seeking damages, reinstatement in the nursing program, and expungement of his failing grades.
On interlocutory appeal, the Ninth Circuit (1) affirmed the district court’s order determining that Plaintiff’s suit for injunctive relief against Columbia Basin College officials in their official capacity could proceed under the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity; and (2) dismissed in part defendants’ appeal for lack of jurisdiction in plaintiff R.W.’s action alleging First Amendment violations and other claims arising from his termination from a nursing program at Columbia Basin College.
The panel held that R.W.’s complaint alleged an ongoing violation of his constitutional rights given the uncertainty as to whether he could reenroll in the nursing program or qualify for financial aid; his claim for prospective relief was not moot; and the Dean of Student Conduct was a proper defendant because he was directly involved with the alleged constitutional violations and there was a question of fact as to whether he had authority to implement injunctive relief if so ordered.
the panel held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the district court’s order declining to reconsider its prior partial summary judgment for R.W. on his 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 claim for violation of the First Amendment. The merits of R.W.’s First Amendment claim were severable from, and neither necessary to nor necessarily resolved by, the district court’s ruling on the Ex parte Young issue and were reviewable upon entry of final judgment.
Court Description: Eleventh Amendment Immunity / Jurisdiction On interlocutory appeal, the panel (1) affirmed the district court’s order determining that plaintiff’s suit for injunctive relief against Columbia Basin College officials in their official capacity could proceed under the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity; and (2) dismissed in part defendants’ appeal for lack of jurisdiction in plaintiff R.W.’s action alleging First Amendment violations and other claims arising from his termination from a nursing program at Columbia Basin College.
Columbia Basin College officials terminated R.W. from the nursing program after learning that he had sought medical treatment for homicidal thoughts about three instructors. R.W. filed suit seeking damages, reinstatement in the nursing program, and expungement of his failing grades. * The Honorable Roger T. Benitez, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation. Determining that it had jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine, the panel agreed with the district court that Columbia Basin College officials were subject to suit in their official capacities for prospective relief under the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity, which permits actions seeking prospective relief against officials for violation of federal law. The panel held that R.W.’s complaint alleged an ongoing violation of his constitutional rights given the uncertainty as to whether he could reenroll in the nursing program or qualify for financial aid; his claim for prospective relief was not moot; and the Dean of Student Conduct was a proper defendant because he was directly involved with the alleged constitutional violations and there was a question of fact as to whether he had authority to implement injunctive relief if so ordered.
The panel held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the district court’s order declining to reconsider its prior partial summary judgment for R.W. on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for violation of the First Amendment. The merits of R.W.’s First Amendment claim were severable from, and neither necessary to nor necessarily resolved by, the district court’s ruling on the Ex parte Young issue, and were reviewable upon entry of final judgment.
The panel also held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the district court’s order substituting the current CBC president for the former president, who had resigned prior to the commencement of litigation. Interlocutory orders granting party substitution under Fed. R. Civ. P. 25 are not subject to immediate review under the collateral order doctrine, and the court’s jurisdiction to review the application of Ex Party Young did not extend to permit interlocutory review of the order.
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.