Michael T. Cornethan v. Patrick Fitzsimons, and Carol Minakami
This text of 956 F.2d 1166 (Michael T. Cornethan v. Patrick Fitzsimons, and Carol Minakami) 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
956 F.2d 1166
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Michael T. CORNETHAN, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Patrick FITZSIMONS, Respondent,
and
Carol Minakami, et al., Respondent-Appellee.
No. 91-35024.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 6, 1992.*
Decided March 10, 1992.
Before EUGENE A. WRIGHT and ALARCON, Circuit Judges, and DAVIES,** CC ORDER
To the extent Cornethan seeks habeas corpus relief as an original matter in this court, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 2241, 2253; Parker v. Sigler, 419 F.2d 827 (8th Cir.1969).
To the extent Cornethan appeals the district court's dismissal of his § 1983 claim, we agree with Judge Sweigert and Judge Dimmick that the statute of limitations bars his claim.
Lacking a basis in law or fact, this appeal is frivolous. See Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 839 (9th Cir.1989).
DISMISSED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
956 F.2d 1166, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 11214, 1992 WL 44715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-t-cornethan-v-patrick-fitzsimons-and-carol-minakami-ca9-1992.