Chen Hale v. Vacaville Housing Authority

Good Law
491 F. App'x 839
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 29, 201211-15693California474 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Chen Hale appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging that the Vacaville Housing Authority (“VHA”) discriminated against her on the basis of her national origin and disability by terminating her participation in the Section 8 housing assistance program. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Colony Cove Props., LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948, 955 (9th Cir.2011), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Hale’s claims regarding the merits of VHA’s decision to terminate her assistance because Hale is precluded under the doctrine of exhaustion of judicial remedies from relitigating the merits in federal court. See Skysign Int'l, Inc. v. City of Honolulu, 276 F.3d 1109, 1115 (9th Cir.2002) (federal courts accord state administrative adjudications the same preclusive effect they would have in state court); Runyon v. Bd. of Trs. of Cal. State Univ., 48 Cal.4th 760 , 108 Cal.Rptr.3d 557 , 229 P.3d 985, 994 (2010) (“Generally speaking, if a complainant fails to overturn an adverse administrative decision by writ of mandate, and if the administrative proceeding possessed the requisite judicial…

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.