Randal N. Wiideman v. Janet Baumann

Good Law
892 F.2d 1048·1990 WL 246·1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 47
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 2, 199087-1995California404 words

Opinion

Opinion

892 F.2d 1048 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Randal N. WIIDEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Janet BAUMANN, Defendant-Appellee. No. 87-1995. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 15, 1989. * Decided Jan. 2, 1990. Before BARNES, WALLACE and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Randal N. Wiideman, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se and in forma pauperis the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court determined that Wiideman's action was frivolous and that he failed to state a claim. Our review is de novo. Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1447 (9th Cir.1987) (failure to state a claim); Rizzo v. Dawson, 778 F.2d 527, 530 (9th Cir.1985) (frivolousness). We affirm. 3 Wiideman contends that he was entitled to a hearing before being denied a job at the prison law library. Although he concedes that he has no entitlement right to such employment, he argues that the denial of the job was additional…

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.