Bookmark
PDF
Share
CaseIQ

Fassio v. Supreme Court of State of California

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Aug 1, 2000

Judgment

CaseIQ

232 F.3d 894 (9th Cir. 2000) Lisa FASSIO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The SUPREME COURT OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA; the Appeal Court of the State of California First Appellate District, Defendants--Appellees. No. 00-15114. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit August 1, 2000

Submitted July 17, 2000.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Charles A. Legge, District Judge, Presiding.

Before KOZINSKI, T.G. NELSON, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Lisa Fassio appeals pro se the district court's Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) dismissal of her complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, see Doe v. Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab., 131 F.3d 836, 838 (9th Cir.1997), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Fassio's complaint against the California Supreme Court and the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District on Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds, and because an arm of the state is not a "person" subject to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See id. at 839; Greater Los Angeles Council on Deafness, Inc. v. Zolin, 812 F.2d 1103, 1110 (9th Cir.1987) (California state courts).

AFFIRMED.