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

How later courts describe this case

  • 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

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Allen v. Scribner. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
73 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