Gomez v. Flores

Good Law
91 F.3d 152·1996 WL 368134·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 36607
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 28, 199695-56321California425 words

Opinion

Opinion

91 F.3d 152 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. John R. GOMEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John FLORES, in his capacity as paint supervisor in Calipatria, CA; Les Safford, in his capacity as paint supervisor in Calipatria, CA; Dan Schithuber, in his capacity as paint supervisor at Calipatria, CA, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-56321. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 25, 1996. * Decided June 28, 1996. Before: NOONAN, LEAVY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 John R. Gomez, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendant prison officials in Gomez's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action. Gomez contends that defendant prison officials violated his constitutional rights by removing him from his job on the prison paint crew, subjecting him to a disciplinary hearing for failing to follow work orders, and failing to reinstate him to his painting position. We have jurisdiction…

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.