Case ID: f-appx_462/html/0697-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Dana WEBB, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Mark COPE, Honorable; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 10-57051.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 19, 2011.
    
    Filed Dec. 20, 2011.
    Dana L. Webb, Encinitas, CA, pro se.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Dana Webb appeals pro se the district court’s order denying her request to proceed in forma pauperis in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging civil rights violations in connection with her divorce case. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Minetti v. Port of Seattle, 152 F.3d 1113, 1115 (9th Cir.1998) (per curiam), and we affirm.

Webb sued Riverside Superior Court Judges Mark Cope and Rebecca Dugan; the estate of Judge Ronald Heumann, formerly a Superior Court judge; and Lori Hunt Kennedy, a former Commissioner in the family law court of Riverside County. Webb alleged that the proceedings in her divorce case were constitutionally flawed because of the “great probability of judicial bias.”

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Webb’s request to proceed in forma pauperis because it appears from the face of the complaint that defendants are entitled to absolute immunity. See id., see also Romano v. Bible, 169 F.3d 1182, 1186 (9th Cir.1999).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.