Smith v. City of Fontana · 818 F.2d 1411

holding that the constitutional interest in familial companionship extends to protect children from unwarranted state interference with their relationships with their parents when father who was unarmed and offered only instinctive resistance to blows administered by police officers died as a result of being shot by police

How later courts described this case

holding that the constitutional interest in familial companionship extends to protect children from unwarranted state interference with their relationships with their parents when father who was unarmed and offered only instinctive resistance to blows administered by police officers died as a result of being shot by police
holding that victim's children "were not directly subjected to the excessive use of state force and therefore cannot maintain personal causes of action under section 1983 in reliance on this Fourth Amendment theory"
holding that “Kelson’s determination that parents have a constitutionally protected liberty interest in their continued association with their children remains good law.”
holding that standing for a damages claim satisfies Article III standing with respect to other forms of relief “involv[ing] the same operative facts and legal theory”

Written by the judges who cited it.

Later courts went against this

Overruled on other grounds by Hodgers-Durgin v. De La Vina, 199 F.3d 1037 (1999)
818 F.2d 1411, 1418 (9th Cir. 1987), overruled in part on other grounds by Hodgers-Durgin v. de la Vina, 199 F.3d 1037
Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDec 21, 199957 citing opinionsother groundsRead it

The opinion

ALARCON, Circuit Judge,

concurring and dissenting:

I concur in the judgment, and in Parts I, II, III, IV, VI, VII, and VIII. I dissent from that portion of Part V which appears to offer advice to the plaintiffs to assist them upon remand in curing the deficiencies in their pleading. These suggestions are unnecessary to the opinion. They will also present clearly avoidable problems for the district court, and this court, in the event of a further appeal, in distinguishing the law of this case from gratuitous obiter dictum.