Burgess v. City & County of San Francisco
This text of 49 F. App'x 122 (Burgess v. City & County of San Francisco) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Nathan Burgess appeals pro se the district court’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) dismissal without leave to amend of his complaint against the City and County of San Francisco and Court Clerk Alan Carlson.
The district court correctly dismissed Burgess’s first amended complaint because he failed to allege a violation of any constitutional right pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1985 and because 18 U.S.C. § 241 and § 242 are criminal statutes which cannot form the basis for a civil suit, Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089, 1092 (9th Cir.1980). The district court correctly held that Burgess failed to state a claim under any of the other statutes raised in his complaint.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
49 F. App'x 122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burgess-v-city-county-of-san-francisco-ca9-2002.