Williams v. Wausau Insurance Companies

Good Law
212 F. App'x 691
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 13, 2006No. 05-56878California247 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Phil J. Williams appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action alleging that he was injured at a Church’s Fried Chicken restaurant in Louisiana, and was treated unfairly during the state court proceedings stemming from that incident. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Ignacio v. Judges of U.S. Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit, 453 F.3d 1160, 1165 (9th Cir.2006), and review for abuse of discretion a district court’s order declaring a party a vexatious litigant, De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.1990). We affirm.

Williams’ complaint is “yet another attempt to attack collaterally the [state] court determination.” See Ignacio, 453 F.3d at 1165 . Accordingly, the district court properly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See id.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendants’ motion for sanctions and issuing a vexatious litigant order. Williams was permitted to, and did, file an opposition to the motion for sanctions, the district court specified Williams’ history of frivolous and burdensome filings,…

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.