AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges

Robert Volney JUSTICE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF the State of CALIFORNIA, County of San Diego, North County Branch; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Robert Volney Justice appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his Rule 60(b)(5) motion seeking to dissolve a vexatious litigant order entered against him in 2003. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, We review for an abuse of discretion. SEC v. Coldicutt, 258 F.3d 939, 941 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion because Justice has not demonstrated any significant change either in factual conditions or in law, nor has he demonstrated that any changed circumstances have made his compliance substantially more onerous, unworkable because of unforeseen obstacles, detrimental to the public interest, or legally impermissible. See id. at 942.

Justice's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

JUSTICE v. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
(Jul 7, 2009)