Page v. Wylie
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
Sammy L. Page appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing his complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm in part, and reverse and remand in part.
We review de novo dismissals for failure to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 816 (9th Cir. 1994) (per curiam).
Here, Page alleged that prison officials refused to pay him parole release funds because of his civil confinement status. Because Page had an adequate state-law post-deprivation remedy, the district court properly dismissed his due process claim. See id.
The district court erred, however, by failing to construe liberally Page’s complaint as also alleging an equal protection violation concerning the release of parole release funds to civilly-confined persons. See Fraley v. United States Bureau of Prisons, 1 F.3d 924, 926 (9th Cir. 1993) (per curiam) (concluding that equal protec
We AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal of his due process claim. We REVERSE the district court’s dismissal of Page’s action and REMAND for further proceedings on his equal protection claim.
Each party shall bear their own costs on appeal.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED and REMANDED in part.
. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Sammy L. PAGE v. James WYLIE Deborah Star Linda L. Melching
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published