Legal Opinion · Dissent

James Brown v. Rawson-Neal Psychiatric Hosp.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided November 4, 2016No. 14-16458Published

1DissentGraber, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent. In my view, we should exercise discretion to consider the Rule 41(b) issue; the- district court abused its discretion by dismissing the case as a 'sanction under Rule 41(b), rather- than on the merits under Rule 12(b)(6); and on the merits the district court erred in ruling that Plaintiff failed to state a federal claim. *1148Accordingly, I would reverse and remand for further proceedings.

1. We have discretion to address Rule 41(b).

As the majority recognizes, we have discretion to consider the Rule 41(b) issue. United States v. Ullah, 976 F.2d 509, 514 (9th Cir. 1992). At…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Omstead v. Dell, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  2. Kennedy v. City of RidgefieldCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
  3. Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  4. United States v. Sakhawat Ullah, Jr., United States of America v. Mary Katherine Gosho-KimCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  5. Linda K. Wood v. Steven C. Ostrander Neil MaloneyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989

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