Langley

Langley v. Brown

Good Law
204 F. App'x 597
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 1, 2006No. 04-16460California358 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Virgil Langley appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of his former attorney, Raymond Brown, Carioca Company (Carioca), and Carioca’s attorney, Albert Van Wagner, in Langley’s diversity action. Langley also appeals the district court’s award of attorneys’ fees to Carioca and Van Wagner. We have juris *598 diction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and, after de novo review, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Carioca, Van Wagner and Brown. We reverse the attorneys’ fees awards.

The district court did not err in granting summary judgment against Langley on his claims for abuse of process brought against Carioca and Van Wagner. Langley failed to submit evidence of specific facts showing that there was a genuine issue whether Van Wagner or Carioca had “an ulterior purpose and [committed] a willful act in the use of judicial process not proper in the regular conduct of the proceeding.” Giles v. Hill Lewis Marce, 195 Ariz. 358 , 988 P.2d 143, 146 (1999).

The district court did not err in granting summary judgment against Langley on his claim for attorney malpractice. Langley failed to submit evidence of specific facts…

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.