Hancock

Hancock v. Walt Disney World Inc.

Good Law
136 F. App'x 18
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 20, 2005No. 03-55143; D.C. No. CV-02-05206-PACalifornia598 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Charito Frias Hancock and her husband, John Hancock (“plaintiffs”) appeal pro se the district court’s dismissal of their complaint against Walt Disney World Company and Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union Local 681, as well as the court’s decision not to award sanctions *20 against the defendants for violations of the local rules. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review de novo a dismissal on statute of limitations grounds. Ventura Mobilehome Comm. Owners Ass’n v. City of San Buenaventura, 371 F.3d 1046, 1050 (9th Cir.2004). We review for abuse of discretion a district court’s decision not to retain supplemental jurisdiction over state claims. Brown v. Lucky Stores, Inc., 246 F.3d 1182, 1187 (9th Cir.2001). We review the district court’s choice of sanctions for violation of the local rules for abuse of discretion. Big Bear Lodging Ass’n v. Snow Summit, Inc., 182 F.3d 1096, 1106 (9th Cir.1999).

Those claims arising under arising under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act are governed by the six-month statute of limitations of § 10(b) of the National Labor Relations Act. DelCostello v. Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 155 ,…

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.