Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California ordered Plaintiff Hassaun Haygood to show cause why his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the Local Rules. The order arose from Plaintiff’s failure to timely oppose, or state non-opposition to, Defendant Danny Chavez’s motion to strike or dismiss the amended complaint.
Holdings
- A district court may use its inherent power and applicable rules to impose sanctions, including dismissal, when a party fails to prosecute an action, obey a court order, or comply with local rules.
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiff's failure to respond to Defendant's motion as required by Local Rule 230(l) warranted an order to show cause and potential dismissal for failure to comply with the Local Rules.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (4)
- Thompson v. Housing Auth., City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130-31 (9th Cir. 1987)(followed)
- Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…