Ochoa

Ochoa v. Housing Authority

Good Law
47 F. App'x 484
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 25, 2002No. 01-55583, 01-56232; D.C. No. CV-00-11173-RSWLCalifornia1,313 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*486 MEMORANDUM **

Appellants, 1 Maria de Jesus Martinez, Billy Childs, Martha Clark, Dorothy Tolivar, and Barron Gardner brought this action against (1) the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Donald J. Smith, Lucille Loyce, and Sandra Raye (collectively “Housing Authority Appellees”), (2) Dwayne E. Williams, and (3) Anthony Sheridan. Appellants appeal the district court’s dismissal of their second amended complaint without leave to amend for failure to state a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Appellants also appeal the district court’s award of Rule 11 sanctions to the Housing Authority Appellees and award of attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 to the Housing Authority Appellees and Williams. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we will not recite them in detail except as necessary.

I. RICO AND § 1983 CLAIMS

We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Chang v. Chen, 80 F.3d 1293, 1296 (9th Cir.1996). All allegations of material fact are taken…

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.