McGary

McGary v. Culpepper

Good Law
322 F. App'x 509
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 15, 2009No. 06-35772California841 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Darnell McGary (“McGary”) appeals the dismissal, without leave to amend, of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against Defendants Roberts, Acker, Richards, Sziebert, and McClung. 1 He also appeals the grant of summary judgment for Defendants Grego-rich and Barnes. We reverse and remand.

1. Dismissal of Claims Against Roberts, Acker, Richards, Sziebert, and McClung

Our rule is established that “in dismissing for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6), a district court should grant leave to amend even if no request to amend the pleading was made, unless it determines that the pleading could not possibly be cured by the allegation of other facts.” Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc) (quotation omitted). This rule is “particularly important for the pro se litigant.” Id. at 1131 (quotation omitted). Here, the district court did not analyze whether amendment of McGar/s claims would be futile. Defendants concede that remand is necessary to allow McGary to amend his claims regarding alleged abusive behavior by his escort team and the alleged failure to protect him from other detainees. We decline to consider, in the first instance, the futility of…

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.