Shins v. Laytonville Unified School Dist.

46 F.3d 1145 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Grace SHINS, and Asha Shins, a minor, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. LAYTONVILLE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; Brian Buckley; Richard Matlock; Karen Loyster; Suzanne Beers; Mark O'Neil; Lynn Robertson; Josef Knight; Thomas W. Evans; Marbry Sipila; John Sipila; Ann O'Neill; Will Emerson; Kitty Emerson; Beth Pfaff; Margarite Maguire; Al Maguire; Mark Incuaniello; and John Pfaff, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-16096. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 15, 1994. Decided Feb. 8, 1995. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, PREGERSON and BEEZER, Circuit Judges. MEMORANDUM 1 Grace Shins and her daughter, Asha Shins, brought this action pro se against various employees of the Laytonville Unified School District and the Wellspring Educational Cooperative for alleged constitutional violations. The district court entered an order dismissing all defendants for failure to state a claim. See Fed.R.Civ.P.…