Morris v. Laury

Good Law
995 F.2d 232·1993 WL 175271·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 21365
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 25, 199391-16594California587 words

Opinion

Opinion

995 F.2d 232 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Brent E. MORRIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M. LAURY; Joe Sorracco; James Bauder; Ronald Bransitter; Brent Kolvert; Douglas Struthers; Michael P. Gibbons; Jerry Maple; Helen Brownfield, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-16594. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 12, 1993. * Decided May 25, 1993. Before HUG, WIGGINS and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Brent Eli Morris appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Following three orders extending the filing date for Morris' response, the district court granted defendants' unopposed motion for summary judgment under Local Rule 140-6 of Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. We affirm. 1 3 * We review the district court's dismissal of the case under the local rules for abuse of discretion. Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir.1988). "That discretion,…

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.