Kathleen Emma Holland v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company of Bloomington, Illinois Straub Clinic & Hospital, Inc.

74 F.3d 1246 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Kathleen Emma HOLLAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY OF BLOOMINGTON, ILLINOIS; Straub Clinic & Hospital, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-15985. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 15, 1995. * Decided Jan. 4, 1996. Before: NORRIS, BEEZER and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 ORDER ** 2 Plaintiff Kathleen Holland appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of her claims against State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and Straub Clinic for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2). 3 The district court correctly found that Holland's maximum possible recovery against State Farm would be $15,000. The district court also correctly found that State Farm and Straub Clinic could not be jointly liable for any of Holland's claims. Accordingly, the district court…