Patsy Rylance v. Wendell Ellis, Sue Ellis, Elaine Peterson

76 F.3d 388 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Patsy RYLANCE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Wendell ELLIS, Sue Ellis, Elaine Peterson, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-15834. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Oct. 20, 1995. Decided Jan. 23, 1996. Before: FERGUSON and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges, and NIELSEN, District Judge. * MEMORANDUM ** Patsy Rylance appeals pro se the district court's judgment in favor of Appellees in Rylance's action alleging that Appellees deprived her of water rights, in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 and the 1866 Mining Act, 30 U.S.C. § 51 . This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . In 1980, Appellant, Patsy Rylance, and several others filed a mining claim, known as the "Eureka Mine #1," in Placer County, California ("the Eureka Claim"). The Eureka Claim covers 86.08 acres of federal government land. The claim location encompasses lots 35, 17, 9 and 31 in section 27 of…