does not consider an issue not passed upon below.” Singleton v. Wulff, 428 U.S. 106, 120, 96 S.Ct. 2868, 49 L.Ed.2d 826 (1976). “Certainly there are circumstances in which a federal appellate court is justified in resolving an issue not passed on below, as where the proper resolution is beyond any doubt....” Id. at 121, 96 S.Ct. 2868. It seems, however, that the appellate courts have sometimes forgotten that resolving issues not addressed by the district court is the exception, not the rule. Compare Weiser v. United States, 959 F.2d 146, 147 (9th Cir.1992) (simply stating that “[o]ur review is not limited to a consideration of the grounds upon which the district court decided the issues”), with River City Markets, Inc. v. Fleming Foods West, Inc., 960 F.2d 1458, 1462 (9th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). Here, the qualified immunity issues are
holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion holding the executive branch has absolute discretion to decide whether to conduct an investigation or prosecute a case recognizing discretion and electing to decide issue holding court unable to rule on issue when the record fails to include copies of the evidence needed to decide issue on appeal recognizing that the second circuit court of appeals has yet to decide the issue but concluding that employers have a duty to accommodate in regarded as cases