MIKE HERNANDEZ, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
GEORGE F. DENTON, DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS; PAUL J. MORRIS, WARDEN; EDDIE YLST, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; MR. HARTMAN, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

9th Cir. | 1992-06-26
Nos. 86-2139, 87-1693 and 87-1694
Before: ALDISERT, WALLACE and SCHROEDER, Circuit Judges.
966 F.2d 533 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1992)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court vacated the judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with Supreme Court precedent regarding the dismissal of in forma pauperis complaints.


Facts & Procedural History

The Supreme Court vacated this court's judgment and remanded for further proceedings. The Supreme Court clarified that in forma pauperis complaints ca…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court

The United States Supreme Court in Denton v. Hernandez, - U.S.-, 112 S.Ct. 1728, 118 L.Ed.2d 340 (1992), vacated the judgment of this court and remanded for further proceedings in conformity with the Court’s opinion.

In its opinion remanding the case to this court, the Supreme Court specifically noted that an in forma pauperis complaint may not be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) “simply because the court finds the plaintiff’s allegations unlikely” and that the plaintiff’s factual allegations “must be weighted in favor of the plaintiff.” Denton, 112 S.Ct. at 1733. The Court also listed various factors which an appeals court might consider in reviewing the district court’s decision to dismiss a complaint as frivolous. These factors reflect, for example, the concern that the district court not “inappropriately resolve[] genuine issues of disputed fact” in the context of a frivolousness determination. See id. at 1734.

Because the Court has determined that the district court is in the “best position to determine which cases fall into th[e] category” of claims which are “clearly baseless,” id., and because the district court in reaching its decision in this matter did not have the benefit of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989), and Denton v. Hernandez, supra, or this court’s decision in Noll v. Carlson, 809 F. 2d 1446 (9th Cir.1987), we VACATE the judgment below and REMAND for proceedings consistent with these opinions.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw