Larry Wilson v. Robert Timko

Good Law
972 F.2d 1348·1992 WL 185446·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 28711
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 5, 199291-16055California1,640 words

Opinion

Opinion

972 F.2d 1348 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Larry WILSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Robert TIMKO, et al., Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-16055. 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 Larry Wilson, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment and dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against various prison officials. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Kruso v. International Tel. & Tel. Corp., 872 F.2d 1416 , 1421 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 496 U.S. 937 (1990), and affirm. 3 * Summary Judgment 4 Summary judgment is proper where there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catratt, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). The moving party must demonstrate there is no…

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.