Horace Thomas v. Merle Bruce

Good Law
591 F. App'x 617
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 30, 201514-16204California237 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Horace Thomas, a.k.a. Horace Andrew Bell, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an Eighth Amendment violation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim. Weilburg v. Shapiro, 488 F.3d 1202, 1205 (9th Cir.2007) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(ii)). We vacate and remand. *

Although the district court properly dismissed Thomas’s complaint because Thomas failed to allege facts sufficient to state a deliberate indifference claim relating to his jaw surgery, the district court abused its discretion by dismissing Thomas’s action without first providing him with an opportunity to amend. See Weilburg, 488 F.3d at 1205 (“Dismissal of a pro se complaint without leave to amend is proper only if it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the complaint could not be cured by amendment.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc) (setting forth…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.