eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
 1997-04

Basolo v. Miller ( 1997 )


Menu:
 
  •                                                                               F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
APR 25 1997
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
STEVEN CARLO BASOLO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
Nos. 96-8106 and 96-8107
WILLIAM L. MILLER, MILLER &                   (D.C. Nos. 96-CV-1045 & 96-CV-1031 )
FASSE, P.C., CHERYL RANCK                             (District of Wyoming)
SCHWARTZ, RANCK & SCHWARTZ,
Defendants - Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, PORFILIO, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this
appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered
submitted without oral argument.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of
law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court generally disfavors the
citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under
the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
Steven Carlo Bassolo, acting pro se, filed two complaints in the district court
asserting claims under
    42 U.S.C. §§ 1983
     and 1985 against two attorneys and their firms.
The district court dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(6). We consolidate the cases here merely for disposition because of their
common issues.
We have examined the briefs and the record and agree with the district court’s
legal analysis in all respects. See Barnard v. Young,
    720 F.2d 1188
    , 1189 (10th Cir.
1983) (a private attorney is not a state actor under § 1983 even though he is an officer of
the court); Meeker v. Kercher,
    782 F.2d 153
    , 155 (10th Cir. 1986) (a guardian ad litem is
not a state actor under § 1983); Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic ,
    113 S. Ct. 753
    , 758 (1993) ( failure to assert a race based animus bars an action under § 1985).
These cases are unassailable impediments to Mr. Basolo’s ability to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted. The judgments are AFFIRMED substantially for the
reasons stated by the district court.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
John C. Porfilio
Circuit Judge