Miller v. Makuch

8 F. App'x 665
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 18, 2001·No. No. 00-16545; D.C. No. CV-00-00323-PGR·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mary Arleen Miller appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing her action against a municipal court judge, the Page, Arizona city attorney, the city manager, and an animal control officer after she was issued a citation on account of crowing by her rooster in violation of a municipal ordinance. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Johnson v. Knowles, 113 F.3d 1114, 1117 (9th Cir.1997). The district court cannot dismiss a complaint unless it appears beyond a reasonable doubt that Miller can prove no set of facts in support of her claims that would entitle her to relief. See id.

We affirm the district court for the reasons stated in the district court’s July 18, 2000 order.

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

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

Miller v. Makuch, 8 F. App'x 665 (9th Cir. 2001).

8 F. App'x 665 (Miller v. Makuch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related