Makenzie Pauly v. Stanford Health Care

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 18, 202422-16655California1,068 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 18 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MAKENZIE PAULY, No. 22-16655

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:18-cv-05387-SI

v. MEMORANDUM*

STANFORD HEALTH CARE, FKA

Stanford Hospital and Clinics,

Defendant-Appellee,

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Susan Illston, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 18, 2024** San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE, FERNANDEZ, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiff-Appellant Makenzie Pauly appeals pro se from the district court’s

summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee Stanford Health Care (SHC) on

Pauly’s five claimed violations of the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Active Labor Act of 1986, 42…

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.