Case Explained: GRIEPSMA V. ANDERSEN, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-03 Docket: 2:21-cv-00302-JCC The ninth-circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment in favor of the defendants in this civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court held that Griepsma forfeited appellate review of his claims against the County defendants because he failed to provide any argument in support of his assertions regarding a jury verdict and excessive force, and failed to move for judgment notwithstanding the verdict under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) to preserve sufficiency of the evidence challenges. The court declined to consider issues related to summary judgment for other County defendants that were not identified or argued in the opening brief. Regarding the DOC defendants, the court affirmed summary judgment because Griepsma failed to exhaust available administrative remedies as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act (42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a)) and failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact that such remedies were effectively unavailable. The court also declined to consider claims regarding detention without a signed court order, lack of medical care before transport, and ineffective assistance of counsel, noting these issues were either not raised below, undeveloped, or inapplicable because there is no right to counsel in § 1983 actions. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.