Case ID: f-appx_430/html/0628-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Leon L. MEYERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John H. BROOMS; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 08-16020.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 20, 2011.
    
    Filed May 3, 2011.
    Leon L. Meyers, Dublin, CA, pro se.
    Before: RYMER, THOMAS and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Leon Meyers appeals pro se from the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that his stepfather, John Brooms, made false legal claims of elder abuse against him, misappropriated his social security income, unlawfully obtained a mortgage of the house which was owned by Meyers’ deceased mother while it was still in probate, and unlawfully evicted Meyers from the house. The district court properly dismissed Meyers’ § 1983 claims against defendants Brooms, Allianee Title Reverse Mortgage and Brooms’ attorneys because they did not act under color of state law. See Price v. State of Hawaii, 939 F.2d 702, 707-08 (9th Cir.1991) (private parties do not generally act under color of state law for § 1983 purposes); Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 318 n. 7, 102 S.Ct. 445, 70 L.Ed.2d 509 (1981) (noting that a private attorney, even one appointed by the court, does not act under the color of state law for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when performing the traditional role of an attorney).

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