Sharon Martin v. Jennell Parks

Good Law
363 F. App'x 454
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 25, 201008-17100California273 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Sharon A. Martin appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging that defendants conspired to violate her constitutional rights in relation to alleged zoning violations on her property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Holt v. Castaneda, 832 F.2d 123, 124 (9th Cir.1987), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the claims against defendants Hollows, Candee, Mize, and Scott because they are entitled to judicial immunity based on alleged acts performed in them official capacities. See Olsen v. Idaho State Bd. of Med., 363 F.3d 916 , 922 (9th Cir.2004) (“Absolute immunity is generally accorded to judges and prosecutors functioning in their official capacities.”).

The district court properly dismissed the remainder of the claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Bermudez v. Duenas, 936 F.2d 1064, 1066 (9th Cir.1991) (per curiam) (“To state a section 1983 claim, a plaintiff must allege facts which show a deprivation of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or federal law....”); Cholla Ready Mix, Inc. v. Civish, 382 F.3d 969, 973 (9th…

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.