From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whatley v. Greyhound Buslines, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
May 26, 1992
967 F.2d 596 (9th Cir. 1992)

Summary

holding that foreclosure sale after dismissal was not violation of automatic stay even where dismissal was reversed on appeal and bankruptcy reinstated

Summary of this case from In re Lomagno

Opinion


967 F.2d 596 (9th Cir. 1992) Alton Bea WHATLEY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GREYHOUND BUSLINES, INC., Defendant-Appellee. No. 88-2885. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit May 26, 1992

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 (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Decided June 1, 1992.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California; No. CV-88-0605-LKK, Lawrence K. Karlton, Chief Judge, Presiding.

E.D.Cal.

AFFIRMED.

Before FARRIS, DAVID R. THOMPSON and FERNANDEZ, 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 provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3.

Alton Bea Whatley, Jr., a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action as frivolous. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

An in forma pauperis complaint may be dismissed before service of process under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) if it is frivolous. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989). A complaint is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis in law or in fact." Id. at 325. We review a district court's dismissal of an action pursuant to section 1915(d) for an abuse of discretion. See Denton v. Hernandez, No. 90-1846, 60 U.S.L.W. 4346, 4348 (May 4, 1992).

To state a section 1983 claim, the plaintiff must allege facts showing a person acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the United States Constitution or the laws of the United States. Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 535 (1981), overruled on other grounds, Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327 (1986).

In his complaint, Whatley named Greyhound Bus Lines, Inc. ("Greyhound") as the sole defendant. Neither Greyhound nor its ticket agent are persons acting under the color of state law. See id. Because there is no state action, Whatley's section 1983 suit lacks an arguable basis in law and was properly dismissed by the district court. See Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 324; Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640-41 (9th Cir.1989).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Whatley v. Greyhound Buslines, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
May 26, 1992
967 F.2d 596 (9th Cir. 1992)

holding that foreclosure sale after dismissal was not violation of automatic stay even where dismissal was reversed on appeal and bankruptcy reinstated

Summary of this case from In re Lomagno

finding reasonable suspicion for packages sent via Express Mail that were heavily sealed, with handwritten labels, paid for in cash, sent from known source location to known drug destination cities, with unverified addresses

Summary of this case from United States v. Williams
Case details for

Whatley v. Greyhound Buslines, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Alton Bea WHATLEY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GREYHOUND BUSLINES, INC.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: May 26, 1992

Citations

967 F.2d 596 (9th Cir. 1992)

Citing Cases

Rice v. Kaufmann (In re Rice)

In re Weston, 101 B.R. 202, 205 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1989), aff'd, 123 B.R. 466 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1991), aff'd…

In re Townley

Weston v. Cibula (In re Weston), 101 B.R. 202 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1989), aff'd 123 B.R. 466 (9th Cir. BAP…