Case Explained: STEWART, ET AL. V. CITY OF TACOMA, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-12 Docket: 3:23-cv-05786-BHS The ninth-circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing Aaron Stewart and Tierra Harvest, LLC’s Fourth Amendment, procedural due process, and state-law claims against the City of Tacoma. The court held that Stewart failed to establish municipal liability under *Monell v. New York City Dep’t of Social Servs.* because he could not prove the unconstitutional conduct resulted from an official policy, a longstanding custom, or the actions of a final policymaker. Regarding the “final policymaker” theory, the court ruled that Sergeant Smith was not a final policymaker and that Stewart failed to provide evidence or legal argument establishing that Deputy City Attorney Michelle Yotter possessed final policy-making authority under Washington state law. Under the “custom” theory, the court found that testimony regarding case-by-case assessments of contraband did not demonstrate a persistent and widespread custom sufficient to constitute city policy. Finally, the court determined that Stewart’s failure-to-train claim was insufficient because he offered only an expert opinion on officer unreasonableness without proving the City had actual or constructive notice that its training omissions would cause constitutional violations. The court also noted that Stewart waived his state-law negligence and conversion claims by failing to adequately brief them, and dismissed arguments regarding Extra Space Storage as inapposite since that entity was no longer a defendant. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.