Sam Stanson Vance Hotel, Ltd., a California Limited Partnership v. Michael Calligan Edward Davenport City of Eureka Tom Hannah James Howard James Lamont Michael Malloy David A. Prendergast Donald Roberts David Tooley James Worthen

985 F.2d 574 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Sam STANSON; Vance Hotel, Ltd., a California limited partnership, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Michael CALLIGAN; Edward Davenport; City of Eureka; Tom Hannah; James Howard; James Lamont; Michael Malloy; David A. Prendergast; Donald Roberts; David Tooley; James Worthen, Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 91-16028, 91-16217. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 6, 1992. Decided Jan. 26, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, No. CV-90-01329-JPV; John P. Vukasin, Jr., District Judge, Presiding. Before CHOY, NOONAN, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Sam Stanson and the Vance Hotel, Ltd. appeal from the district court's dismissal of their complaint for failure to state a claim and failure to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 3 This action was…