James D. Smith v. James K. Rowland

Good Law
995 F.2d 233·1993 WL 191897·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 21320
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 7, 199392-16595California1,050 words

Opinion

Opinion

995 F.2d 233 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James D. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James K. ROWLAND, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-16595. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 25, 1993. * Decided June 7, 1993. Before: HUG, WIGGINS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 James D. Smith, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to comply with the court's orders. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion, Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 321 (1992), and we vacate and remand. 3 Smith filed his original complaint on January 29, 1988, and an amended complaint on November 21, 1990. He alleged repeated violations of his civil rights by the defendants in the form of severe beatings, acts of torture and brutality, denial of necessary medical care, and denial…

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.