William E. Johnson v. City of Tucson Judge Harry Gin Peter Collins F.A. Habra, M.D.

977 F.2d 589 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William E. JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF TUCSON; Judge Harry Gin; Peter Collins; F.A. Habra, M.D., Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-16248. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 22, 1992. * Decided Sept. 30, 1992. Before GOODWIN, D.W. NELSON and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 William E. Johnson appeals pro se the district courts orders dismissing pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against the City of Tucson, Arizona, Arizona Superior Court Judge Harry Gin, the City of Tucson's attorney, Peter Collins, and Dr. F.A. Habra. Johnson contends that the defendants, individually and through a conspiracy, deprived him of his constitutional rights through the actions of Tucson paramedics and police officers who responded to his emergency medical call, and through defendants' role in his state court action for damages stemming from this incident. 1…