Hendrickson v. County of Amador

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NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Warren L. HENDRICKSON; Martha A. Hendrickson, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTY OF AMADOR; Amador County Board of Supervisors, E. Tom Bambert; John C. Begovich; Gale Cuneo; Timothy Davenport; Steve Martin; John Hahn; Patrick Keene; Don F. Howard; Amador County Sheriff's Office, Bachoe Operator Doe; Amador Sanitation Department, Mike Doe, employee; James McClenahan; Eugene Reade, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-16273. 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 Warren and Martha Hendrickson appeal pro se the district court's dismissal of their civil rights action against the County of Amador ("County") on the grounds of res judicata. We review de novo the district court's dismissal on res judicata grounds. Guild Wineries & Distilleries v. Whitehall Co., 853 F.2d 755, 758 (9th…