Nancy Jewell Cross v. Peninsula Corridor Study Joint Powers Board

Good Law
60 F.3d 832·1995 WL 394297·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 25446
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 30, 199594-15439California535 words

Opinion

Opinion

60 F.3d 832 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Nancy Jewell CROSS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PENINSULA CORRIDOR STUDY JOINT POWERS BOARD; et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-15439. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 26, 1995. * Decided June 30, 1995. Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Nancy Jewell Cross ("Cross") appeals pro se from a district court's order denying her motion to strike defendants' bill of costs and her motion for Rule 11 sanctions. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We affirm. 3 We review the district court's order awarding costs and deciding not to impose Rule 11 sanctions for abuse of discretion. Newton v. Thomason, 22 F.3d 1455, 1463 (9th Cir. 1994) (Rule 11 sanctions); Alfex Corp. v. Underwriters Lab. Inc., 914 F.2d 175, 176 (9th Cir. 1990) (per curiam), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 812 (1991) (award of costs). 4 The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that…

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.