Legal Opinion
Brian Malnes v. City of Flagstaff
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 7, 2018No. 16-15059UnpublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM **
Brian Malnes (“Malnes”) appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights and state law claims against various school, city, and law enforcement officials. 1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm in part and dismiss in part.
1. The district court ruled on the Arizona Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings after all the defendants in this action had filed an answer, and hence, “[a]fter the pleadings [had] closed,” in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). Doe v. United States, 419 F.3d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir. 2005)…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Moore v. Kayport Package Express, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Doe v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Godbehere v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1989
- Robert Yousefian v. City of GlendaleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Desert Palm Surgical Group, P.L.C. v. PettaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Jade Waichulaitis, et al. v. Michael Sloat, et al.District Court, D. Arizona · 2025
- Spriggs v. City of San DiegoDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2024