Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572 (9th Cir. 2007) 2007 U.S.App. Lexis 11012 [published] Alison Turner and Marty Stein convinced the Ninth Circuit to vacate a declaratory relief ruling by the district court that a procedure employed by the Los Angeles Police Department and the County of Los Angeles’ District Attorney’s Office to avoid disclosing the existence of a wiretap was a violation of plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment rights. Seven of the eight plaintiffs had been arrested for and convicted of drug-dealing on evidence derived from investigations triggered by the wiretap investigation. Without reaching the constitutional issue, the Ninth Circuit held that Heck v. Humphrey bars their declaratory relief claims under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, because success would necessarily imply the invalidity of their convictions. On the same ground, Heck required affirming summary judgment for defendants on plaintiffs’ damages claims for nondisclosure and judicial fraud. The eighth plaintiff, an attorney whose call was intercepted during the wiretap investigation, was allowed to proceed with his claim for judicial fraud in obtaining the wiretap order, but he was found to have waived any appeal from the dismissal of his claim based on nondisclosure. The Ninth Circuit also rejected plaintiffs’ challenge to the denial of their attorney fees for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiffs neglected to file a separate notice of appeal or to amend the notice of appeal they had filed to challenge the summary judgment rulings on their damages claims.
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
6420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, California 90048
p: (310) 859 7811 | f: (310) 276 5261
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: (415) 315 1774
555 Anton Blvd, Suite 150
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
P: (310) 859-7811
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.