Strauss

Strauss v. Hamilton

Good Law
269 F. App'x 751
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 12, 2008No. 06-35560California364 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Washington state prisoner G. Michael Strauss appeals pro se from the district *752 court’s summary judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various constitutional violations in the handling of his legal mail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896, 900 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that Strauss failed to create a triable issue of fact on his claim that he was denied access to the courts, because he did not show that he suffered an actual injury when defendant Jones expedited delivery of his mail addressed to defendant Hamilton through courier delivery. See Sands v. Lewis, 886 F.2d 1166, 1171 (9th Cir. 1989) (“An actual injury consists of some specific instance in which an inmate was actually denied access to the courts.”) (citations and internal quotations omitted).

Although Strauss did not receive notice of Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 and the consequences of failing to meet its requirements prior to summary judgment, this omission was harmless because the record shows that Strauss “has a complete understanding of Rule 56’s requirements gained from some other…

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.