Mills v. City of Redding
This text of 177 F. App'x 618 (Mills v. City of Redding) 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
Franklin R. Mills appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action as frivolous under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Zimmerman v. City of Oakland, 255 F.3d 734, 737 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Mills’s action alleging Shasta County Superior Court lacks jurisdiction over him because it is a legislatively-created tribunal. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir.1990) (dismissal may be based on lack of cognizable legal theories).
Mills’s remaining contentions lack merit.
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 9th 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
177 F. App'x 618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mills-v-city-of-redding-ca9-2006.