Legal Opinion

Corrigan v. Jenks

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided January 14, 2009No. 07-35584PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

John Louis Corrigan appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, without prejudice, for failure to pay the sanctions imposed in a prior case on the same matter. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s exercise of the power to dismiss. See Hacopian v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 709 F.2d 1295, 1297 (9th Cir.1983), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action because Corrigan failed to prove that he paid the sanctions that were imposed in the prior action or show cause why his…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pesnell v. ArsenaultCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  2. Donald L. Hymes v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
  3. Roland Hacopian v. United States Department of Labor, United States Department of JusticeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Ganiyu Ayinla Jaiyeola v. Robert A. BrundageDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2026

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API