Unpublished Dispositionnotice: Tenth Circuit Rule 36.3 States That Unpublished Opinions and Orders and Judgments Have No Precedential Value and Shall Not Be Cited Except for Purposes of Establishing the Doctrines of the Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel.darlene Schmidt, Petitioner-appellant, v. the Honorable Tyrone Medley, Respondent-appellee.darlene Schmidt, Petitioner-appellant, v. Jordan School Board, Tom Owens, Barnson, Sandy City Police,respondents-appellees.darlene Schmidt, Petitioner-appellant, v. Internal Affairs of Salt Lake Police Department, Officersfulson, Collier, Barraclousa, Billies, Lindsay,respondents-appellees, 935 F.2d 278 (10th Cir. 1991)Annotate this Case
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
Before SEYMOUR, McWILLIAMS and EBEL, Circuit Judges.
EBEL, Circuit Judge.
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. Therefore, the case is ordered submitted without oral argument.
The appellant, Darlene Schmidt, has lodged three appeals before this court. As a threshold matter we must address her request that we transfer these appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on the ground that the Tenth Circuit is under the improper influence of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (The Mormons). We treat this as a motion for disqualification of this entire court from presiding over these instant appeals. As such, it is denied.
In her first appeal, Schmidt v. Medley, No. 90-4176, Schmidt claims that the district court erred in refusing to grant her request for a common law writ of prohibition to prohibit a Utah State trial judge from presiding over a case involving a traffic citation given to her daughter by a police officer. The district court is affirmed for the reasons stated by the district court.
In her second appeal, Schmidt v. Jordan School Board, No. 90-4177, Schmidt claims that the district court has failed to rule on her request that it intervene in a dispute between Schmidt and the school district concerning her contention that the school district discriminates against non-Mormon children. We were unable to find a dispositive final order entered by the district court sufficient to enable us to exercise jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The district court only acted twice prior to Schmidt's filing her notice of appeal: (1) the court granted her motion to proceed in forma pauperis; and (2) the court appointed a magistrate to preside over her case. As neither of these actions represents a final order for purposes of triggering our appellate jurisdiction, we are unable to review the merits of her underlying claim,1 and accordingly we dismiss that appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Finally, in her third appeal, Schmidt v. Internal Affairs of Salt Lake Police Department, No. 90-4178, Schmidt claims that the district court erred in dismissing her complaint against the Salt Lake Police Department in which she requested the court to order the police department to correct statements written on a traffic citation given to her daughter. The district court is affirmed for the reasons stated by the district court.
This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir.R. 36.3
Further, the record does not indicate that the district court has entered a final order since Schmidt filed her notice of appeal