Funtanilla v. Campbell

Good Law
95 F.3d 1157·1996 WL 481710·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 38419
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 26, 199696-15439California1,376 words

Opinion

Opinion

95 F.3d 1157 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Gregorio C. FUNTANILLA, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J. CAMPBELL; M.U. Burvant, M.D.; T. Zink; J. Kaufman; G. Coleman; M. Johnson; Hanson, Chief Medical Officer; S. Bonaccorso; J. Pearson; J. Case; Valadez; Rosario; T.J. Brown; A. Tomasetti; Platt; D. Moscetti; Dean; Malone; Luevano; Gonzalez; Durrall; Higgins; Turner; McGee; Suit; Crow; J. Jennings; Field; Defendants-Appellees. No. 96-15439. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 12, 1996. * Decided Aug. 26, 1996. Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Plaintiff-appellant Gregorio C. Funtanilla, Jr., a California state prisoner, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pro se, alleging that defendants-appellees, various prison officials, violated his constitutional rights by denying him certain privileges while housed in administrative segregation. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of…

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.