John Witherow v. Lawrence Rodriguez John Tilford

Good Law
28 F.3d 111·1994 WL 201137·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 25307
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 20, 199493-16820California463 words

Opinion

Opinion

28 F.3d 111 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. John WITHEROW, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lawrence RODRIGUEZ; John Tilford, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-16820. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 11, 1994. * Decided May 20, 1994. Before: HUG, D.W. NELSON, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 John Witherow, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district's summary judgment in favor of defendant prison employees in his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. Witherow contends defendants filed disciplinary reports against him in retaliation for the exercise of his first amendment rights when he filed, and assisted others to file, civil rights actions against prison officials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 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 is appropriate if, viewing the evidence in the…

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.