Salopek

Salopek v. State

Good Law
17 F. App'x 534
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 24, 2001No. 00-15004; D.C. No. CV-99-00314-HDMCalifornia1,260 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for further proceedings.

Mark J. Salopek (“Salopek”) does not appeal the district court’s dismissal of his claims against the State of Nevada and John Drew, F.L. Cypher, and Frank Clayton (hereinafter “his supervisors”) in their official capacities on the ground that they were immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. Thus, our review is limited to the district court’s dismissal of Salopek’s claims against his supervisors in their individual capacities.

A. Section 1983 Claims

Salopek’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim alleging a violation of his Fourteenth Amendment Due Process rights fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 1 In his complaint, Salopek does not allege that his supervisors conspired to deprive him of any hearing or otherwise prevented him from having a full and fair opportunity to challenge his transfer in his administrative hearing. The fact that Sal-opek alleges that the reason given for his transfer is false is merely part of his § 1983 claim alleging that his supervisors constructively discharged him in retaliation for exercising his…

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.