John Proud, Individually and as Next Friend of Heather Proud, a Minor, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellee., 704 F.2d 1099 (9th Cir. 1983)

Federal Circuits, 9th Cir. (April 26, 1983)

Docket number: 82-4692


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/proud-next-friend-heather-minor-37009672
Id. vLex: VLEX-37009672

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. Lawrence S. Krain, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. County of Orange; Thomas Riley; Roger Stanton; Gaddi Vasquez; Don Roth; Cecil Hicks; Burl Estes, Defendants-Appellees., 968 F.2d 1221 (9th Cir. 1992)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. Charles D. Dearing, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J.D. Swinson, Warden, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees., 990 F.2d 1256 (9th Cir. 1993)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. Joel W. Ellington, Dr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Nancy Becker, Judge; Bob Miller; Frankie Sue Del Papa; Public Defender Office, Defendants-Appellees., 995 F.2d 231 (9th Cir. 1993)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Robert James Walton, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Janet Reno, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees., 15 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 1993)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - Unpublished Disposition Notice: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 States that Citation of Unpublished Dispositions is Disfavored Except for Establishing Res Judicata, Estoppel, or the Law of the Case and Requires Service of Copies of Cited Unpublished Dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Dennis M. Presnell, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Seibels, Bruce & Company, Defendant-Appellee., 873 F.2d 1440 (4th Cir. 1989)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. Alaba O. Awofolu, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. City of Los Angeles; Rudy Carrasco, Officer; William Fox, Defendants-Appellees., 995 F.2d 230 (9th Cir. 1993)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. Joseph A. Parise, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. California Highway Patrol, Defendant-Appellee., 892 F.2d 83 (9th Cir. 1989)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides that Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except When Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel. Andrew L. Groce; Betty Bethea Groce, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. James S. Harrison; Intra-American Oil & Minerals, Inc.; C.B. Harison, Jr.; Monticello Oil Company, Defendants-Appellees., 892 F.2d 83 (9th Cir. 1989)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Ruth Lopez, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. City of Needles, Ca, a Municipal Corporation; Leon Berger; William Cetti; Roy Mills; Flora Hill; Leroy Morgan, Defendants-Appellees., 95 F.3d 20 (9th Cir. 1996)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Betty Lou Allen, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Veterans Administration, Defendant-Appellee., 749 F.2d 1386 (9th Cir. 1984)

Text:

David C. Schutter, Richard A. Marshall, Honolulu, Hawaii, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Michael Schatzow, Mark J. Bennett, Honolulu, Hawaii, for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii.

Before BROWNING, WRIGHT and WALLACE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This is a negligence action against the United States for injuries the minor plaintiff sustained diving into a natural pool in Haleakala National Park. The district court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend within 60 days, reasoning that Hawaii's recreational land use law precluded relief for simple negligence. See Hawaii Rev.Stat. Secs. 520-2(1), -3.

The appealed order, which dismissed the complaint but not the action, is not final and appealable unless special circumstances demonstrate that the trial court found plaintiffs could not save the action by any amendment of the complaint they could reasonably be expected to make. California v. Harvier, 700 F.2d 1217, at 1218 (9th Cir.1983).

Here, plaintiffs argued below that they could state a claim for willful or malicious failure to guard or warn. See Hawaii Rev.Stat. Sec. 520-5(1). They could have saved their action by amending the complaint to make this claim explicit. It is immaterial that plaintiffs decided not to amend. The district court was not advised of that decision and no final judgment was entered.

As the exception to the rule of nonappealability was not satisfied, the order was not appealable. The appeal is dismissed.

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access