Schafler

Schafler v. Spear

Good Law
135 F. App'x 939
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 22, 2005No. 04-17302; D.C. No. CV-04-02535-CRBCalifornia368 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Pepi Schafler appeals pro se the district court’s denial of her motion to disqualify the presiding judge and the court’s order dismissing her action and declaring her a vexatious litigant. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim. Cholla Ready Mix, Inc. v. Civish, 382 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir.2004), ce rt. denied, Cholla Ready Mix, Inc. v. Mendez, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 1828 , 161 L.Ed.2d 724 (2005). We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s denial of a recusal motion, Jorgensen v. Cassiday, 320 F.3d 906, 911 (9th Cir.2003), and entry of a vexatious litigant order, De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.1990). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Schafler’s action for failure to state a claim. See Cholla Ready Mix, Inc., 382 F.3d at 973 (conelusory allegations); Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1201 (9th Cir.1982) (res judicata); Cal.Civ.Proc.Code § 338 (three-year statute of limitations for trespass and theft); Mullis v. United States Bankruptcy Court far Dist. of Nev., 828 F.2d 1385, 1388 (9th Cir.1987) (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.