Karen K. Greene v. Charles Paulson Charles Paulson, P.C.

62 F.3d 1424 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Karen K. GREENE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles PAULSON; Charles Paulson, P.C., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-35633. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 2, 1995. * Decided Aug. 7, 1995. Before: ALARCON, FERNANDEZ, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Karen Greene appeals pro se the district court's 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915 (d) dismissal of her legal malpractice action against Charles Paulson and Charles Paulson, P.C. (collectively "Paulson") as frivolous. Greene alleged that Paulson committed malpractice when he represented Greene in a personal injury action. We review for abuse of discretion. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 3 Greene contends that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing her action. This contention lacks merit. 4 The district court dismissed Greene's action for failure to…