Curtis Haskins Mary Ann Haskins v. Farmers Home Administration Lynn F. Smith Wallace Edland Elwin Manicke John Does

87 F.3d 1319 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Curtis HASKINS; Mary Ann Haskins, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION; Lynn F. Smith; Wallace Edland; Elwin Manicke; John Does, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-35004. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 11, 1996. * Decided June 19, 1996. Before: CANBY, NOONAN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Chapter 7 debtors Curtis and Mary Ann Haskins ("Haskinses") appeal pro se the district court's summary judgment for defendants in their action alleging various constitutional and statutory violations arising from loans made by the Farmers Home Administration ("FmHA") to the Haskinses. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 The Haskinses contend that the district court erred by granting summary judgment for defendants on the basis that the Haskinses lacked standing to bring their action against defendants. We review de novo a district…