Correspondence - #21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DOWDALL LAW OFFICES A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW City of Santa Ana August 28, 2023 Page 16 student's clearly established constitutional rights that his action cannot reasonably be characterized as being in good faith. Wood v. Strickland (1975) 420 U.S. 308, 321-322. "... the City may still be subject to municipal liability for causing a constitutional violation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622, 651-652, 63 L. Ed. 2d 673, 100 S. Ct. 1398 (1980).26 The federal decisions vindicating the right of the people to be free of constitutional violations at the hands of municipal corporations is voluminous. Consider: Gillette v. Delmore, 979 F.2d 1342, 1346-1347 (9th Cir. 1992) (citations and internal quotations omitted), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 932, 114 S. Ct. 345, 126 L. Ed. 2d 310 (1993). After proving that one of the three circumstances existed, a plaintiff must also show that the circumstance was (1) the cause in fact and (2) the proximate cause of the constitutional deprivation. Arnold v. International Business Machines Corp., 637 F.2d 1350, 1355 (9th Cir. 1981); see also City of Springfield v. Kibbe, 480 U.S. 257, 266-68, 107 S. Ct. 1114, 94 L. Ed. 2d 293 (1987) (discussing causation requirement in section 1983 municipal liability cases). See, Trevino v. Gates (9th Cir. 1996) 99 F.3d 911, 918. For these reasons, the city Council, and each member thereof, is on specific notice of the potential conflict of interest between individual rights of the individual Council members and the entity rights of the city of Santa Ana, in respect to being requested to commit an action which quite clearly constitutes a transcription of the charter, state law in the California Constitution. When such conflicts arise, the city may owe each individual Council member the right to advice of separate counsel. See, for example, Greyson, "Constructing Ethical Due Process Walls following Sabey v. Howitt," League Of California Cities, 2013. Policies behind Majority Vote Required by California Government Code The legal policy requiring majority vote is constitutionally grounded. The proposed ordinance violates the charter, state law, in the California Constitution. The clarity of these transgressions is not open to debate. In such case, the deprivation of civil rights is painstakingly clear and precise. Such was the case with, and doomed fate of, "Proposition F" in Howard Jarvis 26 Qualified or "good faith" immunity is an affirmative defense that must be pleaded by a defendant official. Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 (1980).24 Decisions of this Court have established that the "good faith" defense has both an "objective" and a "subjective" aspect. The objective element involves a presumptive knowledge of and respect for "basic, unquestioned constitutional rights." Wood v. Strickland, 420 U.S. 308, 322 (1975). See Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982) 457 U.S. 800, 815. -16-