From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davies v. Baldwin

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 12, 2005
119 F. App'x 150 (9th Cir. 2005)

Opinion

Submitted Jan. 10, 2005.

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Avon Davies #J-42775, CTF--Correctional Training Facility, Soledad, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Paul Arvin Bernardino, Attorney General's Office of the State of California, Sacramento, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.


Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Owen M. Panner, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-01-00335-OMP.

The Honorable Owen M. Panner sitting by designation from the District of Oregon.

Before: BEEZER, HALL 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 provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

California state prisoner Avon Davies appeals pro se the district court's judgment in favor of prison officials in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging he was subject to false disciplinary reports. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, McGary v. City of Portland, 386 F.3d 1259, 1261 (9th Cir.2004) (dismissal for failure to state a claim), Elvig v. Calvin Presbyterian Church, 375 F.3d 951, 955 (9th Cir.2004) (judgment on the pleadings), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed all causes of action against defendant Fry because Davies failed to allege facts demonstrating that Fry's actions caused him any constitutional harm. See Broam v. Bogan, 320 F.3d 1023, 1028 (9th Cir.2003).

The district court properly granted judgment on the pleadings as to the remainder of Davies' claims because Davies' successful administrative appeals demonstrate that defendants' actions caused him no harm. See Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 449 (9th Cir.2000).

Judge Panner did not abuse his discretion in reaching a different conclusion than Judge Levi concerning whether Davies' complaint stated a claim. See Delta Savings Bank v. United States, 265 F.3d 1017, 1027-28 (9th Cir.2001).

We have considered Davies' remaining contentions and conclude that they lack merit.

Davies' request for judicial notice is granted.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Davies v. Baldwin

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 12, 2005
119 F. App'x 150 (9th Cir. 2005)
Case details for

Davies v. Baldwin

Case Details

Full title:Avon DAVIES, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. C. BALDWIN, Correctional Officer; et…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jan 12, 2005

Citations

119 F. App'x 150 (9th Cir. 2005)

Citing Cases

Woolston v. Blythe

Under the evidence it was a question for the jury as to whether the tiller of the soil was a cropper or a…