Mildred Freeston v. Bishop, White & Marshall, P.S.

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 27, 201010-35312California297 words

Opinion

Opinion

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 27 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MILDRED C. FREESTON and SHIRSHA No. 10-35312

SUMERU,

D.C. No. 3:09-cv-05560-BHS Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v. MEMORANDUM *

BISHOP, WHITE & MARSHALL, P.S.;

et al.,

Defendants - Appellees,

PIERCE COUNTY; et al.,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 14, 2010 **

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Mildred C. Freeston and Shirsha Sumeru appeal pro se from the district

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). court’s judgment dismissing their action under the Truth in Lending Act and state

law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. King v.

California,…

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.