Norman Bennett; Banchuen Bennett, Plaintiffs-appellants, v. State of California; District Attorney's Office; Janscully; Office of Family Support; Richard A. Williams;david v. Hayes; D.j. Brown; Franchise Tax Board, State Ofcalifornia; Sherman Block; Carmen O. Hernandez;sacramento County Domestic Relations, Defendants-appellees, 91 F.3d 150 (9th Cir. 1996)
Annotate this CaseBefore: HUG, Chief Judge, and SCHROEDER and POOLE, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Norman and Banchuen Bennett appeal pro se the district court's dismissal for improper venue of their action against the State of California, Sacramento County District Attorney Jan Scully, and numerous State agencies and employees. They allege that the defendants conspired to embezzle Norman Bennett's child support payments. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court's order filed January 24, 1996.
AFFIRMED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. The Bennetts' objection to this court's grant of a telephonic extension of time to appellee Scully is denied
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
