Williams v. Dickson

Decision Date09 May 1968
Docket NumberNo. 21800.,21800.
Citation394 F.2d 627
PartiesElmo WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. Fred DICKSON, Warden, etc., Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Elmo Williams, California Mens Colony, in pro. per.

Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., Brian Amer, Deputy Atty. Gen., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

Before BARNES and BROWNING, Circuit Judges, and SOLOMON,* District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

The judgment of the district court dismissing the action before process was issued and served, without notice to the appellant of any motion to dismiss, and without any finding of frivolity or malice (28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)), is reversed and remanded. Harmon v. Superior Court, 307 F.2d 796 (9th Cir.); Armstrong v. Rushing, 352 F.2d 836, 837 (9th Cir.). We do not pass on the merits of the action, if any.

* Hon. Gus J. Solomon, Chief United States District Judge, Portland, Oregon, sitting by designation.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Diamond v. Pitchess
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • April 29, 1969
    ...may not summarily dismiss an in forma pauperis action without any finding of frivolity or maliciousness whatsoever. Williams v. Dickson, 394 F.2d 627, 628 (9th Cir. 1968); Armstrong v. Rushing, 352 F.2d 836, 837 (9th Cir. 1965). Nevertheless, in making such a finding, a District Court has e......
  • Wendt v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • June 26, 1968

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT