Wright

Wright v. Dunbar

Good Law
1 F. App'x 656
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 8, 2001Nos. 99-15792, 99-16207; D.C. Nos. CV-97-00137-HG, CV-97-00137-HG/FIYCalifornia883 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Harold S. Wright and his tenant, Leimo-ku, Ltd., brought this action against their neighbor, Lance Dunbar, and various state officials, alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387 . The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the state officials on the § 1983 claims asserted against them, and directed the entry of final judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). Appeal No. 99-15792 followed. Subsequently, the district court entered summary judgment on the § 1983 and CWA claims asserted against Dunbar. Appellants filed Appeal No. 99-16207. We have jurisdiction over these consolidated appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the rulings of the district court.

1. The district court properly granted summary judgment on the § 1983 claims against the state officials, who challenge ownership of the property in dispute. They have presented evidence that the State of Hawaii — not appellants — owns the property, thus raising an issue that “implicates special sovereignty interests.” Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe of Idaho, 521 U.S. 261, 281 , 117 S.Ct. 2028 , 138 L.Ed.2d 438 (1997). To even reach…

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.