Kunimoto

Kunimoto v. Fidell

Good Law
97 F. App'x 140
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 12, 2004No. 03-15482; D.C. No. CV-98-00453-DAECalifornia335 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

In January of 2000, the district court awarded Rule 11 sanctions against attorney Gary Dubin for filing frivolous pleadings. Since then, Dubin has filed repeated pro se appeals and other motions with the Ninth Circuit and two petitions for writs of certiorari with the Supreme Court challenging various aspects of the district court’s award of sanctions. Pending the outcome of Dubin’s numerous appeals, the district court had stayed the disbursement of the sanctions to the defendants in the underlying action. After the Supreme Court denied Dubin’s last remaining petition for certiorari, the district court issued an order lifting the stay and disbursing the funds on February 14, 2003. Dubin now appeals, again pro se, from that order.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Dubin’s appeal because the district court’s order was a ministerial order. After the exhaustion of Dubin’s appeals to the Ninth Circuit and the denials of Dubin’s petitions for certiorari, nothing remained for the district court to do but lift the stay and order the disbursement of funds to the defendants. In American Ironworks & Erectors, Inc. v. North American Constr. Corp., 248 F.3d 892 , 898 (9th…

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.