Collins v. Barber, 030314 FED9, 12-55683

Docket Nº:12-55683
Party Name:CHRISTOPHER LILBURNE COLLINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ROGER BARBER, individually; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judge Panel:Before: ALARCÓN, O'SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:March 03, 2014
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

CHRISTOPHER LILBURNE COLLINS, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ROGER BARBER, individually; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 12-55683

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

March 3, 2014

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Submitted February 18, 2014 [**]

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California D.C. No. 2:10-cv-09614-JFW-JPR John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding.

Before: ALARCÓN, O'SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM [*]

Christopher Lilburne Collins appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his rights arising from defendants' attempts to prevent him from using certain golf-related facilities. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Collins's claims against the City of Los Angeles because Collins failed to allege the existence of any unconstitutional policy or custom. See Hart v. Parks, 450 F.3d 1059, 1071 (9th Cir. 2006) (municipal liability under § 1983 exists only for constitutional violations occurring pursuant to an official government policy or custom).

The district court properly dismissed Collins's claims against the private party defendants because Collins failed to allege facts showing that these defendants acted under color of law. See DeGrassi v. City of Glendora, 207 F.3d 636, 647 (9th Cir. 2000) (bare allegations of state action cannot defeat a motion to dismiss; rather, plaintiff must allege facts showing that defendants acted under color of state law or authority).

The district court properly dismissed Collins's claims against defendant Torres because Collins failed to allege facts showing that Torres violated his rights. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (to avoid dismissal, "a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face" (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Gibson v. United States, 781 F.2d 1334, 1338 (9th Cir. 1986) (stating elements of a cause of action under § 1983).

The district court properly dismissed Collins's claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986 because Collins failed to allege facts showing that defendants conspired to obstruct a judicial proceeding...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP