Legal Opinion
Quinata v. Nishimura
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 31, 2015No. 13-17023PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM **
Anna Quinata appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising from state court proceedings to repossess an automobile. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Quinata’s claims against Judge Nishimura because Judge Nishimura is immune from liability. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (barring injunctive relief against judicial officers for their judicial conduct…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Evel Knievel Krystal Knievel v. Espn, a Subsidiary of Walt Disney, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Sadoski v. MosleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
3Cited by1 opinion
- Au v. Trustees of The Estate of Bernice Pauahi BishopDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2020