C. B. v. City of Sonora, 769 F.3d 1005

This case arises from Sonora City Police Department handcuffing an 11-year-old student with ADHD who sat quietly on a playground.
Coach Sinclair called police after deeming the child a “runner” and unmedicated, prompting on-scene interaction with Chief McIntosh and Officer Prock.
The officers handcuffed and removed C.B. from the school and transported him in a police vehicle for about 30 minutes without explaining the arrest or its purposes.
C.B. sued the City, Chief McIntosh, and Officer Prock for Fourth Amendment violations under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and for state-law claims including IIED; the district court denied summary judgment on qualified immunity.
After a seven-day trial, a jury found liability against the defendants on certain claims; the district court entered judgment accordingly; the panel initially vacated for a new trial and later reinstated an en banc review.
On appeal, the court addresses jury-instruction plain error, qualified immunity for the seizure and for the use of handcuffs, evidentiary rulings, and potential damages offsets.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standard of review for belated objections to jury instructions	Plain-error review should apply similarly to criminal standards to correct substantial rights	Civil plain-error review should be narrow and discretionary	Civil plain-error standard adopted; discretionary corrective power exercised narrowly
Whether officers violated the Fourth Amendment by unlawfully seizing C.B.	Seizure lacked probable cause or reasonable grounds; school report of “out of control” plus medication issue justified action	Reasonable cause under T.L.O. or similar standards supported seizure	Officers entitled to qualified immunity on unlawful seizure; not clearly established as an obvious violation
Whether the handcuffing of C.B. violated the Fourth Amendment with excessive force	Handcuffing a calm, small child for 25–30 minutes was excessive	Handcuffs were reasonable to prevent flight and ensure safety given “runner” and medication concerns	Officers not entitled to qualified immunity for handcuffing; use of handcuffs deemed objectively unreasonable under Graham/T.L.O. standards
Whether a damages-offset should be awarded for C.B.’s settlement	Offsets should reduce defendants’ liability	Offset required by California law for joint tortfeasors	Offset denied; no differentiate economic vs. non-economic damages in undifferentiated verdict; California offset rules applied to economic damages only; waiver noted

New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985) (school context allows reduced justification standards; reasonableness under all circumstances)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (use-of-force reasonableness requires balancing factors per case context)
Safford Unified Sch. Dist. No. 1 v. Redding, 557 U.S. 364 (2009) (limits of school-officials' searches; context-specific reasonableness)
Doe ex rel. Doe v. Hawaii Dep’t of Educ., 334 F.3d 906 (2003) (extension of T.L.O. to school-related seizures by police authorities in some contexts)
Preschooler II v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Bd. of Trs., 479 F.3d 1175 (9th Cir. 2007) (applied reasonableness standard to school-related excessive force claims)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonableness standard permits limited seizures with reasonable suspicion)