Case Name: Vincent P. MURRAY, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Jeffry PERLOW, Law Office of Moretti and Perlow, Defendant, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-05-07
Citations: 96 F. App'x 5
Docket Number: Nos. 03-2137, 03-2291
Parties: Vincent P. MURRAY, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Jeffry PERLOW, Law Office of Moretti and Perlow, Defendant, Appellee.
Judges: Before TORRUELLA Circuit Judge, STAHL, Senior Circuit Judge, and LYNCH, Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 96
Pages: 5–5

Head Matter:
Vincent P. MURRAY, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Jeffry PERLOW, Law Office of Moretti and Perlow, Defendant, Appellee.
Nos. 03-2137, 03-2291.
United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.
May 7, 2004.
Vincent P. Murray on brief, pro se.
Jeffry S. Perlow and Moretti & Perlow on brief, for appellee.
Before TORRUELLA Circuit Judge, STAHL, Senior Circuit Judge, and LYNCH, Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The district court's judgment and its denial of the Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion are affirmed. Any constitutional claim against appellees is not cognizable. Cf. Miranda v. Clark County, Nevada, 319 F.3d 465, 468 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 64, 157 L.Ed.2d 28 (2003) (assistant public defender not a state actor when performing traditional role of defense lawyer in criminal proceeding; constitutional claim against public defender not cognizable). The only potential claims here are for legal malpractice and/or breach of contract; but the federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over any such claims in this dispute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Affirmed.