Shelley Von Brincken v. Keith Royal
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Shelley and John von Brincken appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir.2005), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the claims against Deputies Grueneberg and Fevinger because they are entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity for executing a facially valid court order. See Engebretson v. Mahoney, 724 F.3d 1034, 1038-39 (9th Cir.2013) (“[Pjublic officials who ministerially enforce facially valid court orders are entitled to absolute immunity.”).
The district court properly dismissed the claims against Sheriff Royal and the Nevada County Sheriffs Department because the von Brinckens failed to allege facts sufficient to show that Sheriff Royal personally acted to violate their rights, see Hansen v. Black, 885 F.2d 642, 645-46 (9th Cir.1989) (“[Sjupervisory officials are not liable ... on any theory of vicarious liability.”), and failed to allege facts sufficient to show that the Nevada County…