Sylvester T. Tippett v. E. Earle Bayman Edna C. Bayman Clinton J. Henderson James W. Grow Henderson & Grow, a Partnership

981 F.2d 1259 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Sylvester T. TIPPETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. E. Earle BAYMAN; Edna C. Bayman; Clinton J. Henderson; James W. Grow; Henderson & Grow, a partnership, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-35899. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 21, 1992. * Decided Dec. 28, 1992. Before TANG, NOONAN and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Sylvester T. Tippett appeals pro se the district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim of his action alleging that Earle and Edna Bayman and their attorneys violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. Tippett unsuccessfully sued the Baymans in Washington and Idaho state courts and the bankruptcy court alleging that he is the owner of certain cattle in the possession of the Baymans. Tippett now alleges that he lost these lawsuits as a result of false testimony and misrepresentations made by the…