Triplett v. Johnson, 1st Cir. (1992)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsTriplett v. Johnson, 1st Cir. (1992)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUSCA1 Opinion
September 29, 1992
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
____________________
No. 92-1163
HAVEN TRIPLETT,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
PHILLIP W. JOHNSON, ETC., ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. A. David Mazzone, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
____________________
and Selya, Circuit Judge.
_____________
____________________
Haven Triplett on brief pro se.
______________
Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General,
and
Susan
B.
Carndu
__________________
_________________
Assistant Attorney General, on Motion for Summary Decision
Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Decision, for appellees
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam.
__________
the
present
forum
Wachusett Community
grant
Plaintiff is not entitled to relief in
concerning
his
complaint
College (MWCC) wrongfully
funds because
no private right
under the PELL Grant
Program.
that
Mount
retained PELL
of action
L'ggrke v. Benkula,
_______
_______
is implied
966 F.2d
1346 (1st Cir. 1992).
As for plaintiff's
courses,
refused free
Institute
completion,
courses,
complaints that MWCC
CLEP tests,
and
plaintiff has
did
not
failed
failed to
issue
to state
cancelled
credit Elkins
certificate
any
of
cognizable
federal claim.
plaintiff
particular
No
state statute or
a property
or liberty
instructional
certificate of completion.
which plaintiff relies
to determine what
interest in
course,
To
regulation confers
college
on
receiving any
credits,
or
the contrary, the statutes on
grant broad discretion to
types of programs to
offer.
defendants
Nor
need we
determine whether MWCC violated any contractual agreement
it
may have had with plaintiff because a mere breach of contract
of the sort claimed would not give rise to a
1983 claim for
deprivation of property without
San Bernardino
______________
due process.
Physicians' Services Medical Group, Inc.
__________________________________________
Bernardino,
__________
Almodovar,
_________
825
F.2d
1404
(9th
Cir.
v. County of San
______________
1987);
Jimenez
_______
v.
650 F.2d 363, 370 (1st Cir. 1981) ("A mere breach
of contractual right is not a deprivation of property without
constitutional
______________
due
process
of law
Otherwise,
-2-
virtually every controversy
involving an
alleged breach
of
contract
by a
government or
a governmental
institution or
agency or instrumentality would be a constitutional case.").
Affirmed.
________
-3-
