O'Leary v. City of Highland
This text of 46 F. App'x 582 (O'Leary v. City of Highland) 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
James O’Leary appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action against the City of Highland alleging that the City of Highland engaged in “un-American, illegal and overt acts.” We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Sommatino v. United States, 255 F.3d 704, 707 (9th Cir.2001). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed O’Leary’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction over O’Leary’s suit cannot be based on complete diversity, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Caterpillar, Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 68, 117 S.Ct. 467, 136 L.Ed.2d 437 (1996), or a federal question, see 28 U.S.C. § 1331; Republican Party of Guam v. Gutierrez, 277 F.3d 1086, 1089-90 (9th Cir. 2002).
Accordingly, we affirm.
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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 F. App'x 582, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oleary-v-city-of-highland-ca9-2002.