DAVILA v. SMITH

No. 1:15-cv-00094-LJO-EPG-PC.

CHARLES DAVILA, Plaintiff, v. D. SMITH, Defendant.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nature of Suit: 550 Prisoner: Civil Rights
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Charles Davila, Plaintiff, Pro Se.


ORDER FOLLOWING APPEAL ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM AND DISMISSING STATE LAW CLAIMS WITHOUT PREJUDICE

LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.

Plaintiff Charles Davila ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on January 20, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on June 25, 2015. (ECF No. 10.)

On July 26, 2016, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) that Plaintiff's federal claims dismissed with prejudice, and Plaintiff's state claims dismissed without prejudice. (ECF No. 12). Plaintiff objected to the Findings and Recommendation on August 11, 2016. (EF No. 13.)

The Findings and Recommendations were adopted in full by the undersigned judge on August 19, 2016. (ECF No. 14.) The Order adopting the Findings and Recommendations stated that "[t]his action is dismissed, with prejudice, based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983" (Id.) Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal on August 26, 2016. (ECF No. 16.)

On March 21, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a Memorandum affirming in part, vacating in part, and remanding the case. (ECF No. 21.) The Ninth Circuit held that this Court properly dismissed Plaintiff's federal claims and did not abuse its discretion in refusing to exercise supplemental jurisdiction of Plaintiff's state law claims. (Id. at 2-3) However, the Ninth Circuit vacated the judgment "to the extent it dismisses Davila's state law claims with prejudice" and remanded the case "for the sole purpose of dismissing the state law claims without prejudice." (Id. at 3.)

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows:

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), this action is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983, with Plaintiff's federal claims dismissed with prejudice, and Plaintiff's state claims dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases