Ninth Circuit court building in San Francisco. Photo: Sanfranman59, via Wikimedia. CC BY-SA 4.0 license.

DOCUMENT:

###

On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco sided with the City of Arcata and Arcata Police Department (APD) detective Eric Losey in the case of Kyle Zoellner v. City of Arcata.

After charges against Zoellner were dismissed in the case of Humboldt State University student David Josiah Lawson’s stabbing death in May 2017, Zoellner sued the City – including select officials and APD officers – on five claims: unlawful arrest, malicious prosecution, inadequate medical care (while in custody), a Monell (violation of federally protected rights) claim, and defamation (two separate instances of). 

And initially, he won. 

In Oct. 2022, a jury sided with Zoellner and ordered the City and Detective Losey to award him over $750,000 in damages, but U.S. District Court Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley overturned that order just days later. 

This month’s appeals iteration of the case, heard in court on June 10, was Zoellner’s attempt to overturn the District Court decision to overturn the jury’s order.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stuck with Judge Scott Corley on Tuesday, finding that each of Zoellner’s five claims failed. 

“Because the district court reached the correct result, we affirm,” the Court’s decision states.

The first two parts of Zoellner’s case, the unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution claims, turned on whether or not the APD had sufficient probable cause to arrest him as a suspect when officers arrived on-scene at a party early in the morning of April 15, 2017, to find Lawson stabbed. As the Circuit Judges wrote, proof of either claim would require a lack of probable cause, which requires a lower standard of evidence than a conviction.

The Court of Appeals found that the bar for probable cause in Zoellner’s arrest was met.

“Here, ample undisputed evidence supports a ‘fair probability’ that Zoellner may have committed the crime,” the Circuit Judges wrote. “Zoellner was identified by witnesses at the scene as the ‘stabber’ and his clothes were covered in blood.”

The Court also struck down Zoellner’s third claim – inadequate medical care – stating that while Zoellner was not immediately taken to the hospital by APD Officer Devon Nilsen, he also initially refused medical treatment.

“Shortly after Zoellner requested medical treatment, Officer Nilsen took him to the hospital,” the Court wrote.

The Ninth Circuit had two instances of defamation to consider. The first, against Arcata Police Detective Todd Dokweiler, concerned a statement Dokweiler submitted to the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office saying that “other witnesses had seen Zoellner stab the victim” (despite the fact that no witness had identified Zoellner by name). 

The second was against Police Chief Tom Chapman for his statement to press that “it was a white male who stabbed and killed a black male,” which led Chapman to think it was “prudent and logical to look at race as an issue.”

The Court struck down both claims, finding that Detective Dokweiler’s statement was protected under California’s litigation privilege (which protects statements made in the course of official duties and in judicial proceedings from claims such as defamation), and that there was no evidence proving cause and effect between Chief Chapman’s statement and Zoellner’s claimed damages.

“We agree with the district court that Zoellner suffered his claimed injuries ‘simply because of the charges that had been filed against him,’” the decision states.

On the final claim, the Monell (rights violation) claim, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found it failed because it did not identify facts proving the City of Arcata and APD personnel had “final policymaking authority” over his prosecution or “knowledge of the alleged constitutional violation.”

“AFFIRMED,” the decision concluded, upholding the failure of Zoellner’s suit against the City and Detective Losey.

###

Disclosure: The author previously worked for the City of Arcata, beginning in 2019. She was uninvolved in the case this article covers.

###

PREVIOUS LoCO COVERAGE OF THE LAWSON CASE: