Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8898265
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Adelt v. Richmond School District
No. 8898265 · Decided March 9, 1971
No. 8898265·Ninth Circuit · 1971·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
March 9, 1971
Citation
No. 8898265
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
PER CURIAM: Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the district court dismissing her complaint without leave to amend. We affirm. Plaintiff’s allegations affirmatively show a lack of federal jurisdiction of her claim. Diversity is non-existent— the parties all are citizens and residents of California. Nor is the action one which “arises under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States” and hence within the purview of 28 U. S.C. § 1331(a). To the contrary (and despite plaintiff’s conclusionary characterization of defendants’ acts as viola-tive of due process and equal protection, etc.) the claim is simply one for breach of contract, the charge being that the defendant school district refused to perform certain obligations imposed upon it under a teaching contract entered into with plaintiff. Plaintiff did litigate her claim in the appropriate state court; the judgment went against her and was affirmed on appeal. Adelt v. Richmond School District, 250 Cal.App.2d 149 , 58 Cal.Rptr. 151 (1967). Thereafter, the California Supreme Court denied her petition for hearing. The present suit, in effect, constitutes an attempt to have a federal court correct errors assertedly made in the state proceedings. However, the asserted errors are not of Constitutional dimension and present no federal question.
Plain English Summary
PER CURIAM: Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the district court dismissing her complaint without leave to amend.
Key Points
01PER CURIAM: Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the district court dismissing her complaint without leave to amend.
02Plaintiff’s allegations affirmatively show a lack of federal jurisdiction of her claim.
03Diversity is non-existent— the parties all are citizens and residents of California.
04Nor is the action one which “arises under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States” and hence within the purview of 28 U.
Frequently Asked Questions
PER CURIAM: Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the district court dismissing her complaint without leave to amend.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Adelt v. Richmond School District in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on March 9, 1971.
Use the citation No. 8898265 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.