Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Ngatuvai v. Breckenridge, 10th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    S. Moli Ngatuvai appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint challenging a 2009 traffic citation he received. The district court concluded that even a liberal reading of Ngatuvai's complaint revealed no facts demonstrating a deprivation of rights under the U.S. Constitution as required for a § 1983 claim. The appellate court reviewed the dismissal de novo and affirmed the district court's order, seeing no need to repeat the lower court's cogent analysis explaining why dismissal with prejudice was appropriate.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-12-13 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-4025

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    S. Moli Ngatuvai appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint challenging a 2009 traffic citation he received. The district court concluded that even a liberal reading of Ngatuvai's complaint revealed no facts demonstrating a deprivation of rights under the U.S. Constitution as required for a § 1983 claim. The appellate court reviewed the dismissal de novo and affirmed the district court's order, seeing no need to repeat the lower court's cogent analysis explaining why dismissal with prejudice was appropriate.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    11 views2 pages

    Ngatuvai v. Breckenridge, 10th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    S. Moli Ngatuvai appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint challenging a 2009 traffic citation he received. The district court concluded that even a liberal reading of Ngatuvai's complaint revealed no facts demonstrating a deprivation of rights under the U.S. Constitution as required for a § 1983 claim. The appellate court reviewed the dismissal de novo and affirmed the district court's order, seeing no need to repeat the lower court's cogent analysis explaining why dismissal with prejudice was appropriate.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    FILED

    United States Court of Appeals


    Tenth Circuit

    December 13, 2011


    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    Elisabeth A. Shumaker
    Clerk of Court

    TENTH CIRCUIT

    S. MOLI NGATUVAI,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,

    No. 11-4025

    v.

    D. Utah

    TODD BRECKENRIDGE, Provo City


    Officer; ROBERT TROMBLY,
    Prosecutor; JUDGE FNU ROMNEY,

    (D.C. No. 2:09-CV-00803-DS)

    Defendants - Appellees.

    ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

    Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, MURPHY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges.

    After examining the parties briefs and the appellate record, this panel has
    determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the
    determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).
    The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
    S. Moli Ngatuvai appeals from the district courts Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)
    dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. 1983 civil rights complaint. The district court

    This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the
    doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited,
    however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th
    Cir. R. 32.1.

    concluded even a liberal reading of Ngatuvais complaint, which challenged the


    appropriateness of a traffic citation Ngatuvai received in 2009, revealed no facts
    demonstrating a deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by
    the Constitution and laws of the United States. 42 U.S.C. 1983. The district
    court further concluded that dismissal with prejudice was appropriate because
    Ngatuvai had been afforded ample opportunity to cure the deficiencies in his civil
    rights complaint.
    This court reviews a dismissal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) de novo, applying
    the same standard as the district court. Teigen v. Renfrow, 511 F.3d 1072, 1078
    (10th Cir. 2007). Upon de novo review, exercising jurisdiction pursuant to
    28 U.S.C. 1291, this court affirms the district courts order of dismissal. In so
    doing, this court sees no need to repeat the cogent analysis set out in the district
    courts order dated January 12, 2011. Accordingly, the judgment of the district
    court is hereby AFFIRMED.
    ENTERED FOR THE COURT

    Michael R. Murphy
    Circuit Judge

    -2-

    You might also like