Thomas v. Moran

Full title: Dudley Earl THOMAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John MORAN; D. McArthur…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Sep 22, 1998

164 F.3d 631 (9th Cir. 1998)

Opinion

164 F.3d 631 (9th Cir. 1998) Dudley Earl THOMAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John MORAN; D. McArthur; Gerald M. Hocking; Linda Cooper; Ted Farrell, Defendants-Appellees. No. 96-15794. No. CV-93-00301-LDG/RJJ United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit September 22, 1998

Submitted September 14, 1998.

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Lloyd D. George, District Judge, Presiding.

Before O'SCANNLAIN, FERNANDEZ, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^*

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Nevada state prisoner Dudley Earl Thomas appeals pro se the district court's summary judgments for defendants in Thomas's 42 U.S .C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We vacate the district court's judgments and remand for further proceedings, because neither the district court nor defendants advised Thomas of the summary judgment requirements under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. See Rand v. Rowland, No. 95-15428, slip op. 9543, 9557-65 (9th Cir. Aug. 27, 1998) (en banc); Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411-12 (9th Cir.1988).

VACATED and REMANDED. ¹

1 Because of our disposition of this appeal, we do not address Thomas's remaining contentions. See Anderson v. Angelone, 86 F.3d 932, 935 n. 2 (9th Cir.1996).

See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4.