Price

MEMORANDUM **

Mark Steven Price appeals from the district court’s orders granting judgment on the pleadings and summary judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

As ARS § 31-201.01(L) exempts suits authorized by a federal statute, and Price’s fundamental rights can be protected through an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , the Arizona statute neither treads on equal protection nor offends substantive due process. Price’s tort claims do not implicate instances where we have found that the fundamental right of access to the courts applies. See Los Angeles County Bar Ass’n. v. Eu, 979 F.2d 697, 705-06 (9th Cir.1992). The condition Arizona’s state legislature placed on prisoners’ state law tort claims is rationally related to its goal of ensuring that the Arizona courts are not overburdened with comparatively insignificant disputes for which administrative remedies are available. See, e.g., Madrid v. Gomez, 190 F.3d 990, 996 (9th Cir.1999). Nor does § 31-201.01(L) fail to comply with federal law under Westfall v. Erwin, 484 U.S. 292 , 108 S.Ct. 580 , 98 L.Ed.2d 619 (1988), superceded by statute as recognized in Adams v. United States, 420 F.3d 1049, 1052…