Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Allen v. Scribner

828 F.2d 1445

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1987-09-29
Topic: general

finding that district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion despite possible inconvenience to witnesses because transfer would have led to delay

Citator

Cited by: 32 opinions

ALLEN v. SCRIBNER,828 F.2d 1445(9th Cir. 1987)

TERRANCE M. ALLEN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. JERRY SCRIBNER, HANS VAN NES,

OLAF LIEFSON, GORDON TWEEN, ROBERT MILAM, RICHARD ROMINGER, LYNDON HAWKINS,

ROBERT V. DOWELL, CHARLES D. HUNTER, AND JOHN DOES 1 THRU 250,

DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

No. 85-2125.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

September 29, 1987.

Stanley G. Hilton, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.

Michael S. Sorgen, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.

George Chris Stoll, San Francisco, Cal., Susan R. Oie, Sacramento, Cal., for defendants-appellees.

Before NELSON, CANBY and NOONAN, Circuit Judges.

[1] ORDER

[2] The opinion812 F.2d 426(9th Cir. 1987), filed March 5, 1987, is hereby amended as follows:

(1) Page 429, col. 1, lines 36-37:

Under the heading "(i)," "all of the state defendants," is replaced with "state defendants Scribner, Hans Van Nes, Richard Rominger, and Robert Dowell."

(2) Page 429, col. 2, line 5:

The semicolon following "1981" is replaced with a period. The phrase "and (iv)" is deleted and replaced with: "In his affidavit, Allen also alleges that."

(3) Page 434, footnote 17:

In the parenthetical following the citation toBart v. Telford,677 F.2d 622, 625 (7th Cir. 1982)," the words "summary judgment" are changed to "motion to dismiss."

Page 395