David Raymond Durham v. Sharon Bendal

972 F.2d 1338 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. David Raymond DURHAM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sharon BENDAL, et al., Respondents-Appellees. Nos. 90-35846, 91-35747. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 29, 1992. * Decided Aug. 5, 1992. Before TANG, BEEZER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 In these consolidated appeals, David Raymond Durham, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action and 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. In prior appeal No. 87-4308, this court found that Durham had exhausted state remedies as to any habeas claim and remanded for further proceedings as to the remaining defendants. In this second set of appeals, Durham contends that the district court erred by (1) dismissing the action as to four defendants for lack of service and (2) construing the action as a habeas petition rather than a civil rights action and…