From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Wausau Ins. Companies

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 13, 2006
212 F. App'x 691 (9th Cir. 2006)

Opinion

Submitted December 4, 2006 .

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION.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)

Page 692.

Phill J. Williams, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.

Kevin G. McCurdy, Esq., McCurdy & Fuller, LLP, Menlo Park, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.


Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-05-05562-RGK.

Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, 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.

Phil J. Williams appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action alleging that he was injured at a Church's Fried Chicken restaurant in Louisiana, and was treated unfairly during the state court proceedings stemming from that incident. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Ignacio v. Judges of U.S. Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit, 453 F.3d 1160, 1165 (9th Cir.2006), and review for abuse of discretion a district court's order declaring a party a vexatious litigant, De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.1990). We affirm.

Williams' complaint is "yet another attempt to attack collaterally the [state] court determination." See Ignacio, 453 F.3d at 1165. Accordingly, the district court properly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See id.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendants' motion for sanctions and issuing a vexatious litigant order. Williams was permitted to, and did, file an opposition to the motion for sanctions, the district court specified Williams' history of frivolous and burdensome filings, and its order was narrowly tailored to remedy Williams' particular abuses. See De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144, 1147-49 (9th Cir.1990).

Williams' remaining contentions lack merit.

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Williams v. Wausau Ins. Companies

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 13, 2006
212 F. App'x 691 (9th Cir. 2006)
Case details for

Williams v. Wausau Ins. Companies

Case Details

Full title:Phill J. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The WAUSAU INSURANCE COMPANIES…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Dec 13, 2006

Citations

212 F. App'x 691 (9th Cir. 2006)