Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2015

Sheehan v. City of San Francisco

Sheehan v. City of San Francisco
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided July 14, 2015 · Fisher, Graber, Noonan
793 F.3d 1009; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 12096; 2015 WL 4241392 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Counsel

John L. Burris, Esquire, Ayana Alyce Cuevas-Curry, The Law Offices of John L. Burris, Oakland, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant., Peter Julian Keith, Deputy City, San Francisco City Attorney’s Office, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Sheehan v. City of San Francisco

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

In our previous opinion, Sheehan v. City & County of San Francisco, 743 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir. 2014), we affirmed in part and vacated in part the judgment of the district court. In City & County of San Francisco v. Sheehan, — U.S.-, 135 S.Ct. 1765, 191 L.Ed.2d 856 (2015), the Supreme Court reversed our judgment in part and remanded to this court for further proceedings. Under these decisions, the district court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants on Shee-han’s Fourth Amendment claims but, as explained in Parts III and IV of our previous opinion, erred by granting- summary judgment to the defendants on Sheehan’s Americans with Disabilities Act and state law claims. We therefore affirm in part and vacate in part the judgment of the district court and remand to the district court for further proceedings. Each party shall bear its own costs on appeal.

AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.