Pierce v. Stecklein

97 F.3d 1460 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. ISAAC DELOS PIERCE AND ALENE SORENSON PIERCE REVOCABLE TRUST, A revocable trust, Plaintiff-Appellee, * v. Elmer STECKLEIN; Lucille M. Stecklein, Defendants-Appellants, and United States of America; Valley Bank, Defendants. No. 94-35914. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 23, 1996. ** Decided Sept. 25, 1996. Before: FLETCHER, BRUNETTI, and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM *** 2 Elmer and Lucille M. Stecklein appeal pro se the district court's summary judgment for plaintiffs Kai and Violet Jensen. Plaintiffs sought to foreclose on a promissory note and mortgage which the Steckleins had executed in 1978 in favor of Esbern Jensen. 1 Plaintiffs claimed that they were entitled to foreclosure because the mortgage had been assigned to them, and the Steckleins were in default on the note. We review de novo the district court's grant of summary judgment. Bagdadi v. Nazar, 84 F.3d 1194, 1197…