Nutter v. Kansas State University

Full title: Colleen NUTTER, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY, and its…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 1, 2000

232 F.3d 895 (9th Cir. 2000)

Opinion

232 F.3d 895 (9th Cir. 2000) Colleen NUTTER, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY, and its representatives; Lou Ann Clintsman Thoms; United States of America; Judith E. Banks; Stephen M. Jorden; John Wefalo, Dr, President, Kansas State University; James A. Robbins, Dr; Richard H Mattson, Dr, Horticultural Therapy, Advisor; Gretchen Holden, Director, Disabled Student Services, Holton Hall; Houchang Khatamian, Dr, Horticulture, Advisor; Mary Albrecht, Dr, Horticulture, Forestry and Recreation Resources, Undergraduate Program; Robert Tout, Dr; Paul Jenning, Dr, Horticulture Advisor; R. Kent Kimmins, Dr, Horticulture Therapy Advisor; Carl D. Clayberg, Dr; Lorene E. Dahm; Lawrence E. Moeder, Student Financial Assistance Director, Defendants--Appellees. No. 00-35180. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit August 1, 2000

Submitted July 17, 2000. ²

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

D.C. No. CV-99-01785-TSZ

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 (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)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 Western District of Washington, Thomas S. Zilly, District Judge, Presiding.

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

MEMORANDUM ¹

1 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.

Colleen Nutter appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of her second action involving her attendance at Kansas State University from 1985 to 1986. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, see Gregory v. Widnall, 153 F.3d 1071, 1074 (9th Cir.1998) (per curiam), and we affirm.

Because Nutter's complaint was barred by the doctrine of res judicata, the district court properly dismissed her action. See id .

AFFIRMED.