Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

205 F. App'x 594

McElroy v. Viscomi

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided November 13, 2006

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2006-11-13

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Whitley v. Albers · Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors · Clement v. Gomez

Decided 2006-11-13

¶1MEMORANDUM …

¶2California state prisoner Latwahn McElroy appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Los Angeles County officials in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging two deputy sheriffs acted with excessive force in extracting him from his cell. We have jurisdiction pursuant to *59528 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Beene v. Terhune, 380 F.3d 1149,1150 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

¶3The district court properly granted summary judgment because McElroy failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether force was applied in a good faith effort to maintain or restore discipline or used maliciously to cause him harm. See Clement v. Gomez, 298 F.3d 898, 903 (9th Cir.2002) citing Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 320-21, 106 S.Ct. 1078, 89 L.Ed.2d 251 (1986); see also Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir.2001) (this court need not “accept as true allegations that are merely conelusory, unwarranted deductions of fact, or unreasonable inferences.”).

¶4AFFIRMED.

¶5 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

/205/fappx/594 · .json · Public domain