Legal Opinion

Tucker v. Stewart

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 30, 2003No. 03-15147; D.C. No. CV-01-00811-RCBPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Milton Lee Tucker appeals the district court’s order dismissing his action without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed. R.Civ.P. 8. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

We review a dismissal for failure to comply with Rule 8 for abuse of discretion. Carrigan v. California State Legislature, 263 F.2d 560, 565-66 (9th Cir.1959). Rule 8(a)(2) requires that a complaint contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Rule 8(e)(1) requires that “[e]ach averment of a pleading ... be simple, concise, and direct.”

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mchenry v. RenneCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
  2. Carrigan v. California State LegislatureCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Damon Witherbee v. Dan DowDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2022
  2. Evelyn Martinez v. City of Los AngelesDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2021
  3. James B. Jordan v. PlaffDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2023
  4. Kendall DeJuan Simon v. State of CaliforniaDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2021
  5. Leonardo Magallon v. Bureau of PrisonsDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2021

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API