discussed Cited "see" Smith v. City of Bakersfield (2×) Accord 9 Knudsen v. Welch, 872 F.2d 428 (9th Cir. 1989) (approving trial court’s limiting instruction prior to § 10 1983 plaintiff’s cross-examination: “the questions and answers [with regard to prior occasions of 11 confinement] are only relevant insofar as they may bear on the issue of damages”) (unpublished). 12 The Court finds the reasoning of these cases persuasive and applicable here.

discussed Cited "see" Settrini v. City of San Diego See Knudsen v. Welsh, 872 F.2d 428 , 17 428 (9th Cir. 1989) (in false imprisonment and excessive force case, finding magistrate 18 judge did not abuse their discretion in admitting plaintiff’s prior arrests and contacts with 19 police with a limiting instruction that the evidence was relevant only to damages); Peraza 20 v. Delameter, 722 F.2d 1455, 1457 (9th Cir. 1984) (in excessive force case, finding trial 21 court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of plaintiff’s subsequent encounters 22 with police with a jury instruction limiting consideration of the evidence to damage…

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Green v. Baca See Peraza v. Delameter, 722 F.2d 1455, 1457 (9th Cir.1984) (holding that in a § 1983 action for excessive force, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted evidence of plaintiffs subsequent encounters with the police and difficulties in school as relevant to plaintiffs claim that he suffered injury to “ ‘head, body and psyche’ ” as a result of the arrest); see also Knudsen v. Welsh, 872 F.2d 428 , 1989 WL 30470 , *1 (9th Cir.1989) (Upub.Disp.) (holding that in a § 1983 action for illegal detention, trial court did not abuse it discretion in admitting evidence of d…