McGee

McGee v. Steiner

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 19, 202624-5120California393 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 19 2026

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LOLA BONITTA McGEE, No. 24-5120 D.C. No. 2:13-cv-01426-RFB-VCF Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM*

DAVID P. STEINER; CRAIG COLTON;

ROBERT REYNOSA; JENNIFER VO;

MARK MARTINEZ; JERRY WILSON;

COREY RICHARDS; YUL MELONSON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Richard F. Boulware, II, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 18, 2026**

Before: CALLAHAN, FRIEDLAND, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Lola Bonitta McGee appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying

her post-judgment motions to reopen her employment action alleging federal

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.