Watts v. Flemming. Watts v. Maass. Watts v. Maass

Good Law
888 F.2d 131
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 11, 198936-3California252 words

Opinion

Opinion

888 F.2d 131 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Timothy WATTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bob FLEMMING, Kent Ward, Ron Ward, Teri Blankenbaker and John Grill, Defendants-Appellees. Timothy WATTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Manfred MAASS, Sid Coleman, Steve Gassner, Carl Beals and Debie Martin, Defendants-Appellees. Timothy WATTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Manfred MAASS, Sid Coleman, Steve Gassner, Carl Beals and Debie Martin, Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 88-3954, 88-3955 and 88-3956. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 25, 1989. * Decided Oct. 11, 1989. Before BROWNING, KOZINSKI and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 Memorandum ** 2 Dismissal for lack of prosecution was warranted as plaintiff failed to heed repeated orders to submit a narrative statement and to show cause why dismissal would not be appropriate. The absence of "exceptional circumstances" justified the district court's denial of plaintiff's motions for appointment…

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.