Carrigan v. Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders
This text of 291 F. App'x 48 (Carrigan v. Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders) 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
Appellant Debra Carrigan appeals the district court’s judgment dismissing her case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This court reviews the district court’s order de novo, and we affirm. See Love v. United States, 915 F.2d 1242 (9th Cir. 1990); Gibson v. United States, 781 F.2d 1334,1337 (9th Cir.1986).
Our review of the record and of appellant’s response to this court’s order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court’s judgment.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
291 F. App'x 48, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carrigan-v-alverson-taylor-mortensen-sanders-ca9-2008.