Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8688204
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Fink v. Ylst
No. 8688204 · Decided August 1, 2008
No. 8688204·Ninth Circuit · 2008·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
August 1, 2008
Citation
No. 8688204
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** David M. Fink appeals pro se the district court’s order denying his “Application for Order for Service of Process by the Sheriff and/or Registered Process Server.” We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm. Fink sought a writ of execution, which the district court properly issued. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 69(a)(1); Hilao v. Estate of Marcos, 95 F.3d 848, 854 (9th Cir.1996). Fink argues that the writ of execution forms should be amended to make them “self-executing orders.” Fink fails to show any reason why he, unlike other successful litigants, is entitled to a special form of writ of execution to recover his money judgment. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
Fink appeals pro se the district court’s order denying his “Application for Order for Service of Process by the Sheriff and/or Registered Process Server.” We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
Key Points
01Fink appeals pro se the district court’s order denying his “Application for Order for Service of Process by the Sheriff and/or Registered Process Server.” We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
02Fink sought a writ of execution, which the district court properly issued.
03Fink argues that the writ of execution forms should be amended to make them “self-executing orders.” Fink fails to show any reason why he, unlike other successful litigants, is entitled to a special form of writ of execution to recover his
04This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir.
Frequently Asked Questions
Fink appeals pro se the district court’s order denying his “Application for Order for Service of Process by the Sheriff and/or Registered Process Server.” We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Fink v. Ylst in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on August 1, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8688204 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.