Ernest S. Walker v. James A. Anderson Barbara Durham Robert F. Utter Washington State Bar Association Thomas E. Kelley

Ninth Circuit

Ernest S. Walker v. James A. Anderson Barbara Durham Robert F. Utter Washington State Bar Association Thomas E. Kelley

57 F.3d 1079, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 22062, 1995 WL 341530

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 8, 1995

Docket94-36002

StatusPublished

This text of 57 F.3d 1079 (Ernest S. Walker v. James A. Anderson Barbara Durham Robert F. Utter Washington State Bar Association Thomas E. Kelley) 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.

Bluebook

Ernest S. Walker v. James A. Anderson Barbara Durham Robert F. Utter Washington State Bar Association Thomas E. Kelley, 57 F.3d 1079, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 22062, 1995 WL 341530 (9th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

57 F.3d 1079
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

Ernest S. WALKER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
James A. ANDERSON; Barbara Durham; Robert F. Utter;
Washington State Bar Association; Thomas E.
Kelley, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-36002.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 6, 1995.*
Decided June 8, 1995.

Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Ernest S. Walker appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of his civil rights complaint, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. In his complaint, he sought declaratory, monetary, and injunctive relief against defendants, justices of the Washington State Supreme Court, members of the Washington State Bar Board of Governors, and members of the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct, due to their alleged failure to properly exercise their general supervisory and regulatory powers over the lawyers and judges of the State of Washington. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291, and we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its September 16, 1994 order.

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

57 F.3d 1079
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

Ernest S. WALKER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
James A. ANDERSON; Barbara Durham; Robert F. Utter;
Washington State Bar Association; Thomas E.
Kelley, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-36002.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 6, 1995.*
Decided June 8, 1995.

Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Ernest S. Walker appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of his civil rights complaint, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. In his complaint, he sought declaratory, monetary, and injunctive relief against defendants, justices of the Washington State Supreme Court, members of the Washington State Bar Board of Governors, and members of the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct, due to their alleged failure to properly exercise their general supervisory and regulatory powers over the lawyers and judges of the State of Washington. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291, and we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its September 16, 1994 order.

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 F.3d 1079, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 22062, 1995 WL 341530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ernest-s-walker-v-james-a-anderson-barbara-durham--ca9-1995.