Cheryl Hill, et al v. Iberia Parish, et al

Filing

Case: 09-30301

Document: 00511200710

Page: 1

Date Filed: 08/11/2010

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
August 11, 2010 N o . 09-30301 S u m m a r y Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

C H E R Y L HILL; RUTH HILL; JAMES WALKER; VIVIAN ST. JULIEN; J O S E P H HOUSTON; ET AL P la in t if f s - A p p e lla n t s v. S I D HEBERT; JEFF MATTHEWS; ANDRUS GONZALES; BRETT B R O U S S A R D ; LATONYA PERRY; STEPHEN HILL; MATT SMITH; JOSEPH N I S S E N ; SCOTT CLOSIO; DARREN BOURQUE; JEFF SCHMIDT; JEREMY H A T L E Y ; ERIN IRBY D e fe n d a n t s -A p p e lle e s

A p p e a l from the United States District Court fo r the Western District of Louisiana

B e fo r e JOLLY, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* T h e numerous Plaintiffs-Appellants who appeal the dismissal with p r e ju d ic e of their First and Fourth Amendments claims, and the dismissal w it h o u t prejudice of their state law claims, were among the members of a large a n d unruly crowd in New Iberia, Louisiana, that was dispersed by Iberia Parish

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

*

Case: 09-30301

Document: 00511200710

Page: 2

Date Filed: 08/11/2010

No. 09-30301 (L o u is ia n a ) deputy sheriffs who used crowd-dispersant gas canisters after their o r a l orders proved ineffectual. Plaintiffs-Appellants contend that the district c o u r t improvidently granted the summary judgment motions of DefendantsA p p e lle e s grounded in qualified immunity and dismissed this action. W e have reviewed the record on appeal and the applicable law as revealed b y the briefs of the parties and our independent research, as a result of which w e are convinced that the rulings of the district court, based in large measure o n the March 10, 2009 Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge, c o r r e c t ly disposed of this action. Satisfied that the patient and exhaustive a n a ly s is of the case confected by the magistrate judge in his Report and R e c o m m e n d a t io n reached the correct result for the correct reasons, and thus s u p p o r t s the orders and judgment of the district court, we affirm all rulings from w h ic h Plaintiffs-Appellants have appealed, including the above-said judgments o f dismissal. A F F IR M E D .

2