Virginia Legaspi v. St. Joseph’s Medical Center of Stockton;

08-17163Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit1 apr 2010

Testo completo

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
EN/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VIRGINIA LEGASPI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ST. JOSEPH’S MEDICAL CENTER OF
STOCKTON; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 08-17163
D.C. No. 2:07-cv-00291-FCD-
GGH
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Frank C. Damrell, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 16, 2010**
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Virginia Legaspi appeals from the district court’s order dismissing her Labor
Management Relations Act action for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction
FILED
APR 01 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

EN/Research 08-17163 2
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Ghazali v. Moran,
46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the action
where Legaspi’s conduct prejudiced defendants’ ability to defend the action and
the court had already warned Legaspi several times that failure to comply with the
court’s orders could result in dismissal of her action. See id. at 53-54 (outlining
factors to consider before dismissing an action for failure to follow a district
court’s local rules).
Similarly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Legaspi’s
motion for leave to file an untimely opposition because her failure to prosecute was
neither negligent nor excusable. See Briones v. Riviera Hotel & Casino, 116 F.3d
379, 381-82 (9th Cir. 1997) (per curiam) (observing that as a general rule “pro se
litigants are not excused from following court rules”).
Legaspi’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.