From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Kintz

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Feb 22, 2001
4 F. App'x 470 (9th Cir. 2001)

Opinion


4 Fed.Appx. 470 (9th Cir. 2001) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carolyn KINTZ, Defendant-Appellant. No. 00-16149. D.C. No. CV-99-00876-RCB. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. February 22, 2001

Submitted February 12, 2001.

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION.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)

Government brought action against borrower under Federal Debt Collection Procedures Act, alleging failure to repay a student loan. The United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Robert C. Broomfield, J., granted summary judgment for government. Borrower appealed. The Court of Appeals held that government was entitled to recover from borrower absent evidence that, after defaulting on her student loan, she paid outstanding balance in full.

Affirmed.

Page 471.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Robert C. Broomfield, District Judge, Presiding.

Before LEAVY, THOMAS, and RAWLINSON, 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.

Carolyn Kintz appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment for the government in its action brought under the Federal Debt Collection Procedures Act, 28 U.S.C. § 3001, for failure to repay a student loan. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

We review de novo the district court's grant of summary judgment, see Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and we affirm.

Because Kintz has failed to present evidence that, after defaulting on her student loan, she paid the outstanding balance in full, the district court did not err by granting summary judgment. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 251-52, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986) (summary judgment is appropriate where the documentary evidence produced by the parties permits only one conclusion); see also Brannan v. United Student Aid Funds, Inc., 94 F.3d 1260, 1262 n. 3 (9th Cir.1996).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Kintz

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Feb 22, 2001
4 F. App'x 470 (9th Cir. 2001)
Case details for

U.S. v. Kintz

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carolyn KINTZ…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Feb 22, 2001

Citations

4 F. App'x 470 (9th Cir. 2001)