Moises Ponce Alvarez v. King County ( 2019 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 13 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MOISES E. PONCE ALVAREZ, No. 18-35382
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:16-cv-00721-RAJ
v.
MEMORANDUM*
KING COUNTY, a municipal corporation,
Defendant,
and
ADAM R. BUCHAN, in his individual
capacity; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Richard A. Jones, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 11, 2019**
Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Moises E. Ponce Alvarez appeals pro se from the district court’s order
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
denying his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) motion for a new trial following
a jury verdict for defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive
force. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of
discretion. Kode v. Carlson, 596 F.3d 608, 611 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Alvarez’s motion
for a new trial because there was evidence to support the jury’s verdict that
defendants’ use of force was reasonable and not excessive. See Kingsley v.
Hendrickson, 135 S. Ct. 2466, 2473 (2015) (describing considerations for
evaluating whether use of force was reasonable); see also Kode, 596 F.3d at 612
(“[W]here the basis of a Rule 59 ruling is that the verdict is not against the weight
of the evidence, the district court’s denial of a Rule 59 motion is virtually
unassailable. In such cases, we reverse for a clear abuse of discretion only where
there is an absolute absence of evidence to support the jury’s verdict.” (citation and
internal quotation marks omitted)).
AFFIRMED.
2 18-35382