Salman v. Durant

Good Law
81 F.3d 169·1996 WL 145287·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 20913
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 29, 199695-15555California341 words

Opinion

Opinion

81 F.3d 169 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. A.R. SALMAN, individually and as Trustee of January Company and Spring Company, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marcel DURANT; Paul Freitag, Justice of the Peace; Robert Rose, Thomas Steffen, Cliff Young, Justices of the Supreme Court of Nevada, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-15555. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 26, 1996. * Decided March 29, 1996. Before: GOODWIN, WIGGINS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 A.R. Salman appeals pro se the district court's judgment dismissing his civil RICO action against Robert E. Rose, Thomas L. Steffen, and Cliff Young, justices of the Nevada Supreme Court ("Justices"); Paul W. Freitag, a justice of the peace in Sparks, not have standing to bring this action. 1 See id. 3 Because we conclude that this action is frivolous, we grant the Justices' motion for sanctions in the amount of $3,000. See Wilcox v. Commissioner, 848 F.2d 1007, 1009 (9th…

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.