Court Opinion

ID: 9392317
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-04 17:00:47.411434+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:45.407552
License: Public Domain

FOR PUBLICATION

      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PAULETTE SMITH, individually and        No. 20-56254
as Successor in Interest to Albert
Dorsey, deceased,                          D.C. No.
                                        2:19-cv-05370-
              Plaintiff-Appellee,          CAS-JC

 v.
                                           ORDER
EDWARD AGDEPPA, an individual,

              Defendant-Appellant,

and

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, a
municipal entity; DOES, 1 through 10,

              Defendants.

                   Filed May 4, 2023

  Before: Consuelo M. Callahan, Morgan Christen, and
            Daniel A. Bress, Circuit Judges.
2                        SMITH V. AGDEPPA

                          SUMMARY *

                           Civil Rights

    In an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
alleging that a police officer used unreasonable deadly force
when he shot and killed Albert Dorsey during a failed arrest
in the men’s locker room of a gym, a majority of the panel
sua sponte granted a petition for panel rehearing; denied as
moot a petition for rehearing en banc; and ordered that the
opinion and dissent filed on December 30, 2022, be
withdrawn and that the case be resubmitted.

                             ORDER

    The Honorable Gary Feinerman, United States District
Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by
designation, has resigned from judicial service and Judge
Callahan was drawn as a replacement judge pursuant to
General Order 3.2.h. A majority of the panel has voted sua
sponte to grant panel rehearing. Judge Callahan and Judge
Bress voted in favor of rehearing, and Judge Christen voted
against rehearing. The opinion and dissent filed on
December 30, 2022, Dkt. 50, are withdrawn, and the case is
resubmitted. Appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc, Dkt.
No. 59, is denied as moot.

*
 This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has
been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader.